[ovs-dev] [PATCH] netdev-offload-dpdk: Fix for broken ethernet matching HWOL for XL710 NIC

Stokes, Ian ian.stokes at intel.com
Mon Aug 10 20:52:17 UTC 2020


> On 8/7/2020 7:55 AM, Eli Britstein wrote:
> >
> > On 8/6/2020 8:28 PM, Stokes, Ian wrote:
> >>> On 8/6/2020 6:17 PM, Emma Finn wrote:
> >>>> The following 2 commits introduced changes which caused a
> >>>> regression for XL710 devices and functionality ceases for partial
> >>>> offload as a result.
> >>>> 864852a0624a ("netdev-offload-dpdk: Fix Ethernet matching for type
> >>>> only.")
> >>>> a79eae87abe4 ("netdev-offload-dpdk: Remove pre-validate of
> patterns
> >>>> function.")
> >>> OVS is vendor agnostic. That kind of workaround belongs in intel PMD
> >>> in dpdk, not in OVS.
> >> Hi Eli,
> >>
> >> Yes OVS looks to be vendor agnostic, but this code I believe was
> >> already in place and working for this usecase. As such it's removal
> >> introduced a regression from an OVS point of view between the releases.
> >>
> >> We have had examples in the past where workarounds are permissible if
> >> there is a clear path to fixing this in the future on the DPDK side
> >> (which is what I suggest here) (for example scatter gather support
> >> for MTUs in the past raised similar issue where we hand to handle
> >> specific NIC until the next DPDK LTS release).
> >>
> >> So my suggestion is to re-instate the original workaround and remove
> >> its when fixed in the next DPDK LTS which supports the change for
> >> i40e at the PMD layer or if it's backported to the next 19.11 stable
> >> release which would be validated for use with OVS.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > There was a bug with this WA.
> >
> > Please see
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/1587180266-
> 28632-1-git-send-email-JackerDune at gmail.com/.
> >
> > Is it possible to address it in DPDK instead of reverting in OVS and
> > later re-reverting?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Eli
> >
> >>
> >> I've included the i40e DPDK maintainers here for their thoughts also.
> >>
> >> @Beilei/Jia Is this something we can look at to introduce in the i40e
> >> PMD?
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Please take a look at:
> 
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-May/166272.html
> 
> For MLX it was only an optimization. For i40e something similar may be a
> workaround for this issue.

Thanks for this Eli, let me sync with Beilei on this.

If it's something we can resolve in the PMD then I think we can add an errata or known issue for the 2.14 release (and possibly the 2.13 release as I think the same issue is present there).

If it was fixed in the future we could then remove the issue notice.

Regards
Ian
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Eli
> 
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ian
> >>
> >>>> Fixed by partial reversion of these changes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Emma Finn<emma.finn at intel.com>


More information about the dev mailing list