On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 09:53:18PM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> This patch adds two flags BPF_F_BROADCAST and BPF_F_EXCLUDE_INGRESS to
> extend xdp_redirect_map for broadcast support.
> 
> With BPF_F_BROADCAST the packet will be broadcasted to all the interfaces
> in the map. with BPF_F_EXCLUDE_INGRESS the ingress interface will be
> excluded when do broadcasting.
> 
> When getting the devices in dev hash map via dev_map_hash_get_next_key(),
> there is a possibility that we fall back to the first key when a device
> was removed. This will duplicate packets on some interfaces. So just walk
> the whole buckets to avoid this issue. For dev array map, we also walk the
> whole map to find valid interfaces.
> 
> Function bpf_clear_redirect_map() was removed in
> commit ee75aef23afe ("bpf, xdp: Restructure redirect actions").
> Add it back as we need to use ri->map again.
> 
> Here is the performance result by using 10Gb i40e NIC, do XDP_DROP on
> veth peer, run xdp_redirect_{map, map_multi} in sample/bpf and send pkts
> via pktgen cmd:
> ./pktgen_sample03_burst_single_flow.sh -i eno1 -d $dst_ip -m $dst_mac -t 10 
> -s 64
> 
> There are some drop back as we need to loop the map and get each interface.
> 
> Version          | Test                                | Generic | Native
> 5.12 rc4         | redirect_map        i40e->i40e      |    1.9M |  9.6M
> 5.12 rc4         | redirect_map        i40e->veth      |    1.7M | 11.7M
> 5.12 rc4 + patch | redirect_map        i40e->i40e      |    1.9M |  9.3M
> 5.12 rc4 + patch | redirect_map        i40e->veth      |    1.7M | 11.4M
> 5.12 rc4 + patch | redirect_map multi  i40e->i40e      |    1.9M |  8.9M
> 5.12 rc4 + patch | redirect_map multi  i40e->veth      |    1.7M | 10.9M
> 5.12 rc4 + patch | redirect_map multi  i40e->mlx4+veth |    1.2M |  3.8M
> 
> Acked-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Hangbin Liu <liuhang...@gmail.com>
> 
> ---
> v8:
> use hlist_for_each_entry_rcu() when looping the devmap hash ojbs
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <ka...@fb.com>

Reply via email to