[ovs-dev] [PATCH V3 12/12] netdev-offload-dpdk: Fix Ethernet matching for type only

Eli Britstein elibr at mellanox.com
Mon Jun 29 12:21:22 UTC 2020


On 6/29/2020 3:38 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 6/21/20 1:19 PM, Eli Britstein wrote:
>> For OVS rule of the form "eth type is 0x1234 / end", rule is offloaded
>> in the form of "eth / end", which is incorrect. Fix it.
>>
>> Fixes: e8a2b5bf92bb ("netdev-dpdk: implement flow offload with rte flow")
>> Signed-off-by: Eli Britstein <elibr at mellanox.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Roni Bar Yanai <roniba at mellanox.com>
>> ---
>>   lib/netdev-offload-dpdk.c | 5 +++--
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/netdev-offload-dpdk.c b/lib/netdev-offload-dpdk.c
>> index e8b8d6464..e68b6549c 100644
>> --- a/lib/netdev-offload-dpdk.c
>> +++ b/lib/netdev-offload-dpdk.c
>> @@ -860,7 +860,8 @@ parse_flow_match(struct flow_patterns *patterns,
>>   
>>       /* Eth */
>>       if (!eth_addr_is_zero(match->wc.masks.dl_src) ||
>> -        !eth_addr_is_zero(match->wc.masks.dl_dst)) {
>> +        !eth_addr_is_zero(match->wc.masks.dl_dst) ||
>> +        match->wc.masks.dl_type) {
> While calling from the userspace datapath, we always have a match on dl_type.
> This means that it's not possible to hit the 'else' condition.
> I'm worried about the usecase described there.  It's hard to track changes
> in i40e_flow.c.  Can someone test this with XL710?

Yes, that's true. I think we should have it for consistency with the 
rest of the code, and also just in case.

Regarding the XL710 comment - I think it should not have been merged 
into OVS in the first place. If it is an issue with XL710, the relevant 
PMD should handle it, and not OVS. I just kept it in case I miss 
something here. Do you think it's OK to remove it?

>
>>           struct rte_flow_item_eth *spec, *mask;
>>   
>>           spec = xzalloc(sizeof *spec);
>> @@ -876,6 +877,7 @@ parse_flow_match(struct flow_patterns *patterns,
>>   
>>           memset(&consumed_masks->dl_dst, 0, sizeof consumed_masks->dl_dst);
>>           memset(&consumed_masks->dl_src, 0, sizeof consumed_masks->dl_src);
>> +        consumed_masks->dl_type = 0;
>>   
>>           add_flow_pattern(patterns, RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_ETH, spec, mask);
>>       } else {
>> @@ -888,7 +890,6 @@ parse_flow_match(struct flow_patterns *patterns,
>>            */
>>           add_flow_pattern(patterns, RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_ETH, NULL, NULL);
> Actually looking at i40e_flow.c, it seems like this pattern will be rejected.
> But I'm not sure.
>
>>       }
>> -    consumed_masks->dl_type = 0;
>>   
>>       /* VLAN */
>>       if (match->wc.masks.vlans[0].tci && match->flow.vlans[0].tci) {
>>


More information about the dev mailing list