[ovs-dev] [PATCH 0/7 RFC] OVS-DPDK flow offload with rte_flow
Yuanhan Liu
yliu at fridaylinux.org
Thu Aug 31 10:16:32 UTC 2017
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 07:39:35PM +0000, Darrell Ball wrote:
> > > Note that it's disabled by default, which can be enabled by:
> > >
> > > $ ovs-vsctl set Open_vSwitch . other_config:hw-offload=true
> > >
> > > Maybe per in-port configuration would alleviate the issue to a certain degree.
> >
> > Yes, it could be done. I choose it for following reasons:
> >
> > - the option is already there, used by tc offloads.
> > - it also simplifies the (first) patchset a bit, IMO.
> >
> > Of course, I understand.
> >
> > However, I'm okay with making it per port. What's your suggestion for
> > this? Making "hw-offload" be port, or introducing another one? If so,
> > what's your suggestion on the naming?
> >
> > I am not suggesting to drop the global configuration
> > Mainly we ‘consider’ additional per interface configuration because of the restriction with
> > queue action we discuss. This reduces the scope of the queue remapping from what RSS would yield
> > with HWOL.
> > I would expect that when such configuration is done (if it were done), that
> > typically multiple ports would be configured, since traffic flows bi-directionally at least.
> >
> > If we were to do this, one of the possibilities would be something like:
> > ovs-vsctl set Interface dpdk0 other_config:hw-offload=true
>
> What's the scope between the global one and this one then? We simply
> ignore the globle one for OVS-DPDK?
>
> [Darrell]
> If we were to have such an option (and it is a pretty big ‘if’), then more
> specific scope (i.e. interface scope here) would eclipse global scope I think.
> Maybe initially, we try to keep it as simple as possible,
Like the one I have already done, re-use "hw-offload" option? :)
This is the simplest I could think of.
--yliu
> but I could see some other use cases
> for interface level config., like HW resource contention for multiport NICs ?
>
> > Thanks for the review. BTW, would you please add me in 'to' or 'cc'
> > list while replying to me? Otherwise, it's easy to get missed: too
> > many emails :/
> >
> > of course
>
> Thank you!
>
> --yliu
>
>
More information about the dev
mailing list