see inline
Le 11 janv. 2016 08:08, "Wenzhuo Lu" <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com> a ?crit :
>
> Add UDP tunnel add/del support on ixgbe. Now it only support
> VxLAN port configuration.
> Although the VxLAN port has a default value 4789, it can be
> changed. We support VxLAN port configuration to meet the
> change.
> Note, the default value of VxLAN port in ixgbe NICs is 0. So
> please set it when using VxLAN off-load.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c | 93
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c
b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c
> index 4c4c6df..381cbad 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c
> @@ -337,6 +337,10 @@ static int ixgbe_timesync_read_time(struct
rte_eth_dev *dev,
> struct timespec *timestamp);
> static int ixgbe_timesync_write_time(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> const struct timespec *timestamp);
> +static int ixgbe_dev_udp_tunnel_add(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_eth_udp_tunnel
*udp_tunnel);
> +static int ixgbe_dev_udp_tunnel_del(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_eth_udp_tunnel
*udp_tunnel);
>
> /*
> * Define VF Stats MACRO for Non "cleared on read" register
> @@ -495,6 +499,8 @@ static const struct eth_dev_ops ixgbe_eth_dev_ops = {
> .timesync_adjust_time = ixgbe_timesync_adjust_time,
> .timesync_read_time = ixgbe_timesync_read_time,
> .timesync_write_time = ixgbe_timesync_write_time,
> + .udp_tunnel_add = ixgbe_dev_udp_tunnel_add,
> + .udp_tunnel_del = ixgbe_dev_udp_tunnel_del,
> };
>
Your patch is not adding HW tunnel support but port management.
> /*
> @@ -6191,6 +6197,93 @@ ixgbe_dev_get_dcb_info(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#define DEFAULT_VXLAN_PORT 4789
> +
> +/* on x550, there's only one register for VxLAN UDP port.
> + * So, we cannot add or del the port. We only update it.
> + */
> +static int
> +ixgbe_update_vxlan_port(struct ixgbe_hw *hw,
> + uint16_t port)
> +{
> + IXGBE_WRITE_REG(hw, IXGBE_VXLANCTRL, port);
> + IXGBE_WRITE_FLUSH(hw);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/* Add UDP tunneling port */
> +static int
> +ixgbe_dev_udp_tunnel_add(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_eth_udp_tunnel *udp_tunnel)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + struct ixgbe_hw *hw =
IXGBE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data->dev_private);
> +
> + if (hw->mac.type != ixgbe_mac_X550 &&
> + hw->mac.type != ixgbe_mac_X550EM_x) {
> + return -ENOTSUP;
> + }
> +
> + if (udp_tunnel == NULL)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + switch (udp_tunnel->prot_type) {
> + case RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_VXLAN:
> + /* cannot add a port, update the port value */
> + ret = ixgbe_update_vxlan_port(hw, udp_tunnel->udp_port);
> + break;
> +
> + case RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_GENEVE:
> + case RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_TEREDO:
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Tunnel type is not supported now.");
> + ret = -1;
> + break;
> +
> + default:
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid tunnel type");
> + ret = -1;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
Is tunnel_add a proper naming? We need to keep flexibility for NICs that
will support full HW tunneling support.
Here it is about setting registers.
> +
> +/* Remove UDP tunneling port */
> +static int
> +ixgbe_dev_udp_tunnel_del(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_eth_udp_tunnel *udp_tunnel)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + struct ixgbe_hw *hw =
IXGBE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_HW(dev->data->dev_private);
> +
> + if (hw->mac.type != ixgbe_mac_X550 &&
> + hw->mac.type != ixgbe_mac_X550EM_x) {
> + return -ENOTSUP;
> + }
> +
> + if (udp_tunnel == NULL)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + switch (udp_tunnel->prot_type) {
> + case RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_VXLAN:
> + /* cannot del the port, reset it to default */
> + ret = ixgbe_update_vxlan_port(hw, DEFAULT_VXLAN_PORT);
> + break;
> + case RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_GENEVE:
> + case RTE_TUNNEL_TYPE_TEREDO:
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Tunnel type is not supported now.");
> + ret = -1;
> + break;
> + default:
> + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid tunnel type");
> + ret = -1;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> static struct rte_driver rte_ixgbe_driver = {
> .type = PMD_PDEV,
> .init = rte_ixgbe_pmd_init,
> --
> 1.9.3
>
I think the semantic of this serie should be revisited. It is about adding
the support of inner/outer checksum for encapsulated packets but not the
support of HW encap/decap (tunnel?).
Thank you,
Vincent
