Dave When I set next0 to ETHERNET_INPUT - packets seems to be processed normally This make sense because my plugin is based on the sample - which is invoked *before* the ETHERNET_INPUT
Best Regards Avi > -----Original Message----- > From: Avi Cohen (A) > Sent: Thursday, 08 March, 2018 9:13 AM > To: 'Dave Barach'; vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > Subject: RE: [vpp-dev] VPP - mechanism to drop packets > > Thank you Dave, > The drop is working perfectly > But the other path - to let the packet continue in the 'normal' path is > broken. > How to set the next0 for the 'normal' path ? > The sample plugin (which my plugin is based on) set it to INTERFACE_OUTPUT > - which is not suitable for this case. > > Btw - how can I see the whole path on the graph assigned for a packet ? > > Best Regards > Avi > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of > > Dave Barach > > Sent: Wednesday, 07 March, 2018 4:08 PM > > To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VPP - mechanism to drop packets > > > > Dear Avi, > > > > Yes, if you decide to drop b1, set next1 / error1 in the obvious way. > > > > The macros vlib_validate_buffer_enqueue_x[2|4] sort out the various > > incorrect speculative enqueue / 2 or 4 pkts going to different successor > > node > cases. > > Simply set (nextN, errorN) as desired and let the boilerplate code deal with > it... > > > > D. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Avi Cohen (A) <avi.co...@huawei.com> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 9:02 AM > > To: Dave Barach (dbarach) <dbar...@cisco.com>; vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > > Subject: RE: [vpp-dev] VPP - mechanism to drop packets > > > > Thank you Dave - this is very helpful > > Please see comments inline > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of > > > Dave Barach > > > Sent: Wednesday, 07 March, 2018 3:20 PM > > > To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > > > Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] VPP - mechanism to drop packets > > > > > > Add an arc from your node to the "error-drop" node, set next0 = > > > MYNODE_NEXT_ERROR and b0->error = node->errors[SOME_ERROR]. > > > > > [Avi Cohen (A)] > > I'm using the standard loop - this is with the next0 and next1 - this > > mean that we are processing 2 pkts within a single stage of the loop - > > correct > ? > > In this case if I want to drop both pkts I have to set the next1 to > NEXT_ERROR > > as well correct ? > > > > > Please use the standard dual/single - or quad/single - loop code > > > pattern to walk the incoming vector of buffer indices. You will hate > > > your life if you try to code the vector-walk from first principles. > > > It's not impossible, but I it will be a waste of your time / a bunch > > > of needless > > aggravation. > > > > > > b0->sw_if_index[VLIB_TX] is interpreted in a couple of different ways. > > > b0->"ip4/6- > > > lookup" interprets it as a fib index. "interface-output" interprets > > > it as a [tx] hardware interface ID. > > > > > > I'm not sure what you're trying to do, but if it involves an ip > > > lookup, do NOT set > > > b0->sw_if_index[VLIB_TX]. Let the fib code do its job, and send pkts > > > b0->to either > > > the input nodes - if mandatory input checks / ttl decrement have not > > > been performed - or to the lookup stage if e.g. you've rewritten the > > > ip header(s) in some fashion. > > [Avi Cohen (A)] > > I'm implementing my fwding function and I want to bypass the IP-lookup > > And maybe do some rewrite and then to interface-output > > > > Best Regards > > Avi > > > > > > HTH... Dave > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Avi > > > Cohen > > > (A) > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 6:38 AM > > > To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > > > Subject: [vpp-dev] VPP - mechanism to drop packets > > > > > > Hi, > > > I'm implementing a simple policy plugin , below is the pseudo-code > > > > > > Go over the packets vector > > > While (there are packets to process ) { Check if a packet match a > > > specific rule > > > If yes - set the out-interface for the packet to be transmitted > > > Else - drop packet > > > } > > > > > > 2 Question - > > > 1. is there any function/mechanism that implements a drop ? or any > > > filed in the packet's metadata for drop marking ? > > > 2. Regarding the set tx out interface - I see that I can set the > > > sw_if_index[VLIB_TX] - so the packet will be later transmitted > > > through this interface - is this correct ? > > > > > > Best Regards > > > Avi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#8467): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/8467 View All Messages In Topic (6): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/topic/14153536 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/14153536/21656 New Topic: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/post Change Your Subscription: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/editsub/21656 Group Home: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev Contact Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Terms of Service: https://lists.fd.io/static/tos Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
