Date:   Thu, 28 Jun 2018 09:13:30 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, simon.horman@...ronome.com,
        john.hurley@...ronome.com, dsahern@...il.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 0/9] net: sched: introduce chain templates
 support with offloading to mlxsw


On 26/06/18 03:59 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> 
> For the TC clsact offload these days, some of HW drivers need
> to hold a magic ball. The reason is, with the first inserted rule inside
> HW they need to guess what fields will be used for the matching. If
> later on this guess proves to be wrong and user adds a filter with a
> different field to match, there's a problem. Mlxsw resolves it now with
> couple of patterns. Those try to cover as many match fields as possible.
> This aproach is far from optimal, both performance-wise and scale-wise.
> Also, there is a combination of filters that in certain order won't
> succeed.
> 
 >
> Most of the time, when user inserts filters in chain, he knows right away
> how the filters are going to look like - what type and option will they
> have. For example, he knows that he will only insert filters of type
> flower matching destination IP address. He can specify a template that
> would cover all the filters in the chain.
> 

Is this just restricted to hardware offload? Example it will make sense
for u32 in s/ware as well (i.e flexible TCAM like TCAM based
classification). i.e it is possible that rules the user enters
end up being worst case a linked list lookup, yes? And allocating
space for a tuple that is not in use is a waste of space.

If yes, then I would reword the above as something like:

For very flexible classifiers such as TCAM based ones,
one could add arbitrary tuple rules which tend to be inefficient both
from a space and lookup performance. One approach, taken by Mlxsw,
is to assume a multi filter tuple arrangement which is inefficient
from a space perspective when the user-specified rules dont make
use of pre-provisioned tuple space.
Typically users already know what tuples are of interest to them:
for example for ipv4 route lookup purposes they may just want to
lookup destination IP with a specified mask etc.
This feature allows user to provide good hints to the classifier to
optimize.


> This patchset is providing the possibility to user to provide such
> template  to kernel and propagate it all the way down to device
> drivers.
> 
> See the examples below.
> 
> Create dummy device with clsact first:
> # ip link add type dummy
> # tc qdisc add dev dummy0 clsact
> 
> There is no template assigned by default:
> # tc filter template show dev dummy0 ingress
> 
> Add a template of type flower allowing to insert rules matching on last
> 2 bytes of destination mac address:
> # tc filter template add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip flower dst_mac 00:00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:FF:FF
> 
> The template is now showed in the list:
> # tc filter template show dev dummy0 ingress
> filter flower chain 0
>    dst_mac 00:00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:ff:ff
>    eth_type ipv4
> 
> Add another template, this time for chain number 22:
> # tc filter template add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip chain 22 flower dst_ip 0.0.0.0/16
> # tc filter template show dev dummy0 ingress
> filter flower chain 0
>    dst_mac 00:00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:ff:ff
>    eth_type ipv4
> filter flower chain 22
>    eth_type ipv4
>    dst_ip 0.0.0.0/16
> 
> Add a filter that fits the template:
> # tc filter add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip flower dst_mac aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff/00:00:00:00:00:0F action drop
> 
> Addition of filters that does not fit the template would fail:
> # tc filter add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip flower dst_mac aa:11:22:33:44:55/00:00:00:FF:00:00 action drop
> Error: Mask does not fit the template.
> We have an error talking to the kernel, -1
> # tc filter add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip flower dst_ip 10.0.0.1 action drop
> Error: Mask does not fit the template.
> We have an error talking to the kernel, -1
> 
> Additions of filters to chain 22:
> # tc filter add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip chain 22 flower dst_ip 10.0.0.1/8 action drop
> # tc filter add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip chain 22 flower dst_ip 10.0.0.1 action drop
> Error: Mask does not fit the template.
> We have an error talking to the kernel, -1
> # tc filter add dev dummy0 ingress proto ip chain 22 flower dst_ip 10.0.0.1/24 action drop
> Error: Mask does not fit the template.
> We have an error talking to the kernel, -1
> 
> Removal of a template from non-empty chain would fail:
> # tc filter template del dev dummy0 ingress
> Error: The chain is not empty, unable to delete template.
> We have an error talking to the kernel, -1
> 
> Once the chain is flushed, the template could be removed:
> # tc filter del dev dummy0 ingress
> # tc filter template del dev dummy0 ingress
> 

BTW: unlike the other comments on this - I think the syntax above
is fine ;-> Chain are already either explicitly or are implicitly
(case of chain 0) specified.

Assuming that one cant add a new template to a chain if it already
has at least one filter (even if no template has been added).

I like it - it may help making u32 more friendly to humans in some
cases.

cheers,
jamal

Powered by blists - more mailing lists