On 11/3/2020 7:33 AM, Matan Azrad wrote:
Hi Ferruh
Thank you for the fast review.
Please see inline
From: Ferruh Yigit
On 11/1/2020 5:48 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
When an age action becomes aged-out the rte_flow_get_aged_flows should
return the action context supplied by the configuration structure.
In case the age action created by the shared action API, the shared
action context of the Testpmd application was not set.
In addition, the application handler of the contexts returned by the
rte_flow_get_aged_flows API didn't consider the fact that the action
could be set by the shared action API and considered it as regular
flow context.
This caused a crash in Testpmd when the context is parsed.
This patch set context type in the flow and shared action context and
uses it to parse the aged-out contexts correctly.
Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad <ma...@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Dekel Peled <dek...@nvidia.com>
---
app/test-pmd/config.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
---------
app/test-pmd/testpmd.h | 7 +++++++
2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c index
e0203f0..3581f3d 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/config.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c
@@ -1665,8 +1665,10 @@ void port_flow_tunnel_create(portid_t port_id,
const struct tunnel_ops *ops)
return NULL;
}
if (rte_flow_conv(RTE_FLOW_CONV_OP_RULE, &pf->rule, ret, &rule,
- error) >= 0)
+ error) >= 0) {
+ pf->ctype = CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW;
return pf;
+ }
free(pf);
return NULL;
}
@@ -1831,6 +1833,7 @@ void port_flow_tunnel_create(portid_t port_id,
const struct tunnel_ops *ops)
}
psa->next = *ppsa;
psa->id = id;
+ psa->ctype = CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION;
*ppsa = psa;
*action = psa;
return 0;
@@ -1849,6 +1852,12 @@ void port_flow_tunnel_create(portid_t port_id,
const struct tunnel_ops *ops)
ret = action_alloc(port_id, id, &psa);
if (ret)
return ret;
+ if (action->type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_AGE) {
+ struct rte_flow_action_age *age =
+ (void *)(uintptr_t)(action->conf);
+
+ age->context = psa;
+ }
The port flow is using 'update_age_action_context()' function, can same
function be utilized to update age context for shared action too?
For updating flow context, the code iterates all actions to find the age action
- so it worth to call dedicate function.
For updating shared action context - it a direct access.
So, they have different search method.
Just to reduce the age action related churn in the code, if it can be abstracted
in to a single function I prefer it, if that doesn't make sense it is OK.
btw, not sure why 'update_age_action_context()' is not static, if you will touch
it can you please make it static function?
And overall this context setting for the age action is requiring the special
conditions in the flow create path, can you please check if it can be moved to
'cmdline_flow.c' for age parsing code somehow?
/* Poisoning to make sure PMDs update it in case of error. */
memset(&error, 0x22, sizeof(error));
psa->action = rte_flow_shared_action_create(port_id, conf,
action, @@ -2379,7 +2388,10 @@ struct rte_flow_shared_action *
void **contexts;
int nb_context, total = 0, idx;
struct rte_flow_error error;
- struct port_flow *pf;
+ union {
+ struct port_flow *pf;
+ struct port_shared_action *psa;
+ } ctx;
if (port_id_is_invalid(port_id, ENABLED_WARN) ||
port_id == (portid_t)RTE_PORT_ALL) @@ -2397,7 +2409,7 @@
struct rte_flow_shared_action *
printf("Cannot allocate contexts for aged flow\n");
return;
}
- printf("ID\tGroup\tPrio\tAttr\n");
+ printf("%-20s\tID\tGroup\tPrio\tAttr\n", "Type");
nb_context = rte_flow_get_aged_flows(port_id, contexts, total, &error);
if (nb_context != total) {
printf("Port:%d get aged flows count(%d) !=
total(%d)\n", @@ -2406,18 +2418,31 @@ struct rte_flow_shared_action *
return;
}
for (idx = 0; idx < nb_context; idx++) {
- pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
- if (!pf) {
+ ctx.pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
+ if (!ctx.pf) {
printf("Error: get Null context in port %u\n", port_id);
continue;
}
- printf("%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32 "\t%c%c%c\t\n",
- pf->id,
- pf->rule.attr->group,
- pf->rule.attr->priority,
- pf->rule.attr->ingress ? 'i' : '-',
- pf->rule.attr->egress ? 'e' : '-',
- pf->rule.attr->transfer ? 't' : '-');
+ switch (ctx.pf->ctype) {
At this stage you don't know if the context is 'pf' or 'psa', but you rely that
both
structure first element is "enum testpmd_context_type" and this requirement is
completely undocumented.
Yes, will add a comment.
Why don't create a common context and pass that one the the age action for
both 'pf' & 'psa', like
struct port_flow_age_action_context {
enum testpmd_context_type ctype;
union {
struct port_flow *pf;
struct port_shared_action *psa;
} ctx;
};
We considered this option too,
It looked us more optimized to not utilize more memory and alloc\free time for
each age context.
One more option we considered:
Use age action context pointer as uint32_t\uintptr_t - use 2 bits for type and others
for pf->id psa->id.
What do you think about this?
Will 'id' be enough? I see other information is used, though not sure if it is
only for print.
I will be unexpected to use the pointer for id but it works, can you please add
enough comment to clarify the usage?
I think this also prevents to corrupt 'pf' and 'psa' just for age action.
+ case CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW:
+ printf("%-20s\t%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32
+ "\t%c%c%c\t\n",
+ "Flow",
+ ctx.pf->id,
+ ctx.pf->rule.attr->group,
+ ctx.pf->rule.attr->priority,
+ ctx.pf->rule.attr->ingress ? 'i' : '-',
+ ctx.pf->rule.attr->egress ? 'e' : '-',
+ ctx.pf->rule.attr->transfer ? 't' : '-');
+ break;
+ case CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION:
+ printf("%-20s\t%" PRIu32 "\n", "Shared action",
+ ctx.psa->id);
+ break;
+ default:
+ printf("Error: invalid context type %u\n", port_id);
+ break;
+ }
}
if (destroy) {
int ret;
@@ -2426,15 +2451,15 @@ struct rte_flow_shared_action *
total = 0;
printf("\n");
for (idx = 0; idx < nb_context; idx++) {
- pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
- if (!pf)
+ ctx.pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
+ if (!ctx.pf || ctx.pf->ctype !=
+ CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW)
continue;
When the context is 'CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION', who destroys it?
Destroy request is optional, I didn't add a support to destroy something here:
1 options here is to save all the flows assigned to the age shared action
inside the shared action context and destroy all of them + the shared aged
action.
It can be step 2 later.
OK
- flow_id = pf->id;
+ flow_id = ctx.pf->id;
ret = port_flow_destroy(port_id, 1, &flow_id);
if (!ret)
total++;
}
- printf("%d flows be destroyed\n", total);
+ printf("%d flows destroyed\n", total);
}
free(contexts);
}
diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h index
519d551..92aaa19 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
+++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
@@ -143,8 +143,14 @@ struct fwd_stream {
struct pkt_burst_stats tx_burst_stats;
};
+enum testpmd_context_type {
+ CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW,
+ CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION,
+};
+
The enum prefix is too generic, 'CONTEXT_TYPE_', what do you think clarifying
what context we are talking about?
enum flow_age_action_context_type {
FLOW_AGE_ACTION_CTX_FLOW,
FLOW_AGE_ACTION_CTX_SHARED_ACTION,
}
?
I think better, thanks.
/** Descriptor for a single flow. */
struct port_flow {
+ enum testpmd_context_type ctype; /**< Context type. */
struct port_flow *next; /**< Next flow in list. */
struct port_flow *tmp; /**< Temporary linking. */
uint32_t id; /**< Flow rule ID. */ @@ -155,6 +161,7 @@ struct
port_flow {
/* Descriptor for shared action */
struct port_shared_action {
+ enum testpmd_context_type ctype; /**< Context type. */
struct port_shared_action *next; /**< Next flow in list. */
uint32_t id; /**< Shared action ID. */
enum rte_flow_action_type type; /**< Action type. */
What do you think about changing the rte_flow_get_aged_flows API name to
rte_flow_get_aged_contexts ?
Here context has some data do identify the aged flows, right? If so
'rte_flow_get_aged_flows' also reasonable I think.
No strong opinion but the API name as it is looks good to me.
