From: Ajit Khaparde <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:42 PM To: Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda <[email protected]> Cc: Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]>; Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]>; Andrew Rybchenko <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Rasesh Mody <[email protected]>; Shahed Shaikh <[email protected]>; Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Liron Himi <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev][PATCH v7 1/3] ethdev: add level support for RSS offload types
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 7:27 AM Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 7:08 PM > To: Kiran Kumar Kokkilagadda > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Thomas Monjalon > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Andrew Rybchenko > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Rasesh Mody > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Shahed Shaikh > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Nithin Kumar > Dabilpuram <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Liron Himi > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev][PATCH v7 1/3] ethdev: add level support for RSS > offload types > > External Email > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > On 9/1/2020 4:27 AM, [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > > From: Kiran Kumar K > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > > This patch reserves 2 bits as input selection to select Inner and > > outer encapsulation level for RSS computation. It is combined with > > existing > > ETH_RSS_* to choose Inner or outer layers. > > This functionality already exists in rte_flow through level parameter > > in RSS action configuration rte_flow_action_rss. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kiran Kumar K > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > --- > > V7 Changes: > > * Re-worked to keep it in sync with rte_flow_action_rss and support > > upto > > 3 levels. > > * Addressed testpmd review comments. > > > > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h index 70295d7ab..13e49bbd7 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h > > @@ -552,6 +552,33 @@ struct rte_eth_rss_conf { > > #define RTE_ETH_RSS_L3_PRE64 (1ULL << 53) > > #define RTE_ETH_RSS_L3_PRE96 (1ULL << 52) > > > > +/* > > + * We use the following macros to combine with the above layers to > > +choose > > + * inner and outer layers or both for RSS computation. > > + * bit 50 and 51 are reserved for this. > > + */ > > + > > +/** level 0, requests the default behavior. Depending on the packet > > + * type, it can mean outermost, innermost, anything in between or even no > RSS. > > + * It basically stands for the innermost encapsulation level RSS > > + * can be performed on according to PMD and device capabilities. > > + */ > > +#define ETH_RSS_LEVEL_0 (0ULL << 50) > > I can see from history how this is involved, but the 'ETH_RSS_LEVEL_0' naming > is > not really clear what it is, the naming in v6 is more clear. > > What about following one: > 0 -> LEVEL_PMD_DEFAULT > 1 -> LEVEL_OUTER > 2 -> LEVEL_INNER > 3 -> LEVEL_INNER_OUTER > > This doesn't exactly match to rte_flow one, but closer than v6 one. This ends > with max level 2. And defines a way to say both inner and outer. This one looks good to me. If everyone is ok with the proposed changes, I will send V8. How about following one: 0 -> LEVEL_PMD_DEFAULT 1 -> LEVEL_OUTERMOST 2 -> LEVEL_INNERMOST This way we can avoid any ambiguity especially if stacked tunnel headers become real. 3 -> LEVEL_INNER_OUTER But I am not sure if INNER_OUTER has a use case. Alternatively, why not just add uint32_t level; just like in case of rte_flow_action_rss? It will break ABI but its 20.11. Thanks -Ajit Can I send V8 with this proposal? 0 -> LEVEL_PMD_DEFAULT 1 -> LEVEL_OUTERMOST 2 -> LEVEL_INNERMOST If anyone want INNER_OUTER, they can specify LEVEL_OUTERMOST | LEVEL_INNERMOST > > > + > > +/** level 1, requests RSS to be performed on the outermost packet > > + * encapsulation level. > > + */ > > +#define ETH_RSS_LEVEL_1 (1ULL << 50) > > + > > +/** level 2, requests RSS to be performed on the > > + * specified inner packet encapsulation level, from outermost to > > + * innermost (lower to higher values). > > + */ > > +#define ETH_RSS_LEVEL_2 (2ULL << 50) > > I can see you are trying to copy rte_flow usage, but this doesn't really makes > sense here. Where the value of the level is defined in this case? If not > defined > how the PMD knows which level to use? > > > +#define ETH_RSS_LEVEL_MASK (3ULL << 50) > > + > > +#define ETH_RSS_LEVEL(rss_hf) ((rss_hf & ETH_RSS_LEVEL_MASK) >> 50) > > + > > /** > > * For input set change of hash filter, if SRC_ONLY and DST_ONLY of > > * the same level are used simultaneously, it is the same case as > > -- > > 2.25.1 > >
