> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Viktorin <vikto...@cesnet.cz> > Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 4:30 PM > To: Jiawei(Jonny) Wang <jiaw...@nvidia.com> > Cc: Asaf Penso <as...@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Ori Kam > <or...@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Duplicating traffic with RTE Flow > > On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 02:28:03 +0000 > "Jiawei(Jonny) Wang" <jiaw...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > Hi Jan, > > > > Sorry for late response, Could you check the below latest patches that > > support flow-based traffic sampling? (based on: net/enic: > > support VXLAN decap action combined with VLAN pop) > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatc > > > hwork.dpdk.org%2Fproject%2Fdpdk%2Flist%2F%3Fseries%3D12410&da > ta=02 > > %7C01%7Cjiaweiw%40nvidia.com%7Cf5fad57a2357485f8fe308d85f9adcca% > 7C4308 > > > 3d15727340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C1%7C637364466050833489&sd > ata=1l > > rhsIVvHpiTSA7c4k6ceMnQQsDRs2UtgWnvRomTS7s%3D&reserved=0 > > > > " The solution introduces a new action that will sample the incoming > > traffic and send a duplicated traffic with the specified ratio to the > > application, while the original packet will continue to the target > > destination." > > And, > > set sample_actions 1 port_id id 1 / end > > flow create 0 ... pattern eth / end actions > > sample ratio 1 index 1 / port_id id 2... > > The flow will result in all the matched ingress packets will be sent > > to port 2, and also mirrored the packets and sent to port 1. > > Hi, > > excuse me, but what am I doing wrong? > > $ git log -1 --oneline > a4ab862 net/enic: support VXLAN decap action combined with VLAN pop > > $ curl > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpatc > hwork.dpdk.org%2Fseries%2F12410%2Fmbox%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cji > aweiw%40nvidia.com%7Cf5fad57a2357485f8fe308d85f9adcca%7C43083d1572 > 7340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C1%7C637364466050833489&sdata=ZD > glETAx9A9C3iaXFPhLUb2vtUTGE7R8aK5ngJF7lko%3D&reserved=0 > > sample-action-rte-flow.patch > > $ git apply sample-action-rte-flow.patch > error: patch failed: doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.rst:62 > error: doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.rst: patch does not apply > > Or... > > $ git am -3 sample-action-rte-flow.patch > Applying: ethdev: introduce sample action for rte flow > fatal: sha1 information is lacking or useless > (doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst). > Repository lacks necessary blobs to fall back on 3-way merge. > Cannot fall back to three-way merge. > Patch failed at 0001 ethdev: introduce sample action for rte flow > > Jan > Hi Jan,
Please try the v8 patch: https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=12525 I rebased it based on the main code and it should work for you. Thanks. Jonny > > > > Thanks. > > B.R. > > > > Jonny > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jan Viktorin <vikto...@cesnet.cz> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 4:04 AM > > > To: Asaf Penso <as...@nvidia.com> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ori Kam <or...@nvidia.com>; Jiawei(Jonny) Wang > > > <jiaw...@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Duplicating traffic with RTE Flow > > > > > > On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 14:23:42 +0000 > > > Asaf Penso <as...@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello Jan, > > > > > > > > You can have a look in series [1] where we propose to add APIs to > > > > > > > DPDK20.11 for both mirroring and sampling for packets, with > > > additional actions of the different traffic. > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpat > > > ch > > > > > > > > > > > es.dpdk.org%2Fproject%2Fdpdk%2Flist%2F%3Fseries%3D12045&data= > > > 02%7C > > > > > > > > 01%7Cjiaweiw%40nvidia.com%7C8c9585855f9640f37ae608d85e698dbb%7C43 > > > 083d1 > > > > > > > > 5727340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C1%7C637363154745490399&sdata > > > =mdG51 > > > > > > > > UgntQvMjs%2BPpRozwt2dtAcdWR8j9MXBtZ3%2Bl8k%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > Thanks! Can you please recommend me a base where I can apply this > > > series? For current main (dc18be1d8) I got: > > > > > > error: patch failed: drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c:9537 > > > error: drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c: patch does not apply > > > error: patch failed: drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c:80 > > > error: drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c: patch does not apply > > > error: patch failed: drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c:9007 > > > error: drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c: patch does not apply > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Asaf Penso > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > > >From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Jan Viktorin > > > > >Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 3:56 PM > > > > >To: dev@dpdk.org > > > > >Subject: [dpdk-dev] Duplicating traffic with RTE Flow > > > > > > > > > >Hello all, > > > > > > > > > >we are looking for a way to duplicate ingress traffic in > > > > >hardware. > > > > > > > > > >There is an example in [1] suggesting to insert two fate actions > > > > >into the RTE Flow actions array like: > > > > > > > > > > flow create 0 ingress pattern end \ > > > > > actions queue index 0 / void / queue index 1 / end > > > > > > > > > >But our experience is that PMDs reject two fate actions (tried > > > > >with mlx5). Another similar approach would be to deliver every > > > > >single packet into two virtual > > > > >functions: > > > > > > > > > > flow create 0 ingress pattern end \ > > > > > actions vf index 0 / vf index 1 / end > > > > > > > > > >Third possibility was to use passthru: > > > > > > > > > > flow create 0 ingress pattern end \ > > > > > actions passthru / vf index 0 / end flow create 0 ingress > > > > > pattern end \ > > > > > actions vf index 1 / end > > > > > > > > > >Again, tried on mlx5 and it does not support the passthru. > > > > > > > > > >Last idea was to use isolate with passthru (to deliver both to > > > > >DPDK application and to the kernel) but again there was no > > > > >support on mlx5 for > > > passthru... > > > > > > > > > > flow isolate 0 true > > > > > flow create 0 ingress pattern end actions passthru / rss end / > > > > > end > > > > > > > > > >Is there any other possibility or PMD+NIC that is known to solve > > > > >such > > > issue? > > > > > > > > > >Thanks > > > > >Jan Viktorin > > > > > > > > > >[1] > > > > >https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% > 2 > > > > >Fd > > > > > > > > oc > > > > >.dpdk > > > > >.org%2Fguides%2Fprog_guide%2Frte_flow.html%23table-rte-flow- > > > redirect- > > > > >queue-5- > > > > >3&data=02%7C01%7Casafp%40nvidia.com%7C1a46005bec5245e7 > 29e > > > 708d > > > > >85bd24caf%7C43083d15727340c1b7db39efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637 > 360 > > > 3060 > > > > >73519816&sdata=EOF%2Fz62crvBZK8rwzwKIWxj5cVlfPVnU3FLmc > L9X > > > 2w0%3 > > > > >D&reserved=0 > >
