[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D713DDC.4060109@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 11:30:36 -0800
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
To: Dimitrios Michailidis <dm@...lsio.com>
CC: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH 02/10] ethtool: add ntuple flow specifier
to network flow classifier
On 3/2/2011 12:03 PM, Dimitrios Michailidis wrote:
> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 11:11 -0800, Dimitrios Michailidis wrote:
>>> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>>> /**
>>>> * struct ethtool_flow_ext - flow spec common extension fields
>>>> * @vlan_etype: EtherType for vlan tagged packet to match
>>>> * @vlan_tci: VLAN tag to match
>>>> * @data: Driver-dependent data to match
>>>> *
>>>> * Note: Additional fields may be inserted before @vlan_etype in future,
>>>> * but the offset of the existing fields within the containing structure
>>>> * (&struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec) will be stable.
>>>> */
>>>> struct ethtool_flow_ext {
>>>> __be16 vlan_etype;
>>>> __be16 vlan_tci;
>>>> __be32 data[2];
>>>> };
>>>
>>> I am wondering about the semantics of these vlan_* fields. Is vlan_etype the
>>> Ethertype in the VLAN header or the type after it?
>>
>> It would be the the type in the VLAN tag. The nested ethertype is
>> normally implied by flow_type to be ETH_P_IP.
>>
>> This does leave the question of what this would mean:
>>
>> struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec fs = {
>> .flow_type = ... | FLOW_EXT,
>> ...
>> .h_ext.vlan_tci = htons(0x1234),
>> .m_ext.vlan_etype = 0xffff,
>> };
>>
>> This says the TCI must be == 0x1234 but the type can be anything. But
>> the type surely has to be be one assigned for use in VLAN tags. Should
>> we leave it to the driver/hardware to determine what those valid types
>> are, or should we reject this as valid?
>
> Right. Devices have some internal rules for what qualifies as a VLAN frame.
> If users are given the option to specify vlan_etype what do they get?
> At least we need to specify what is expected so drivers can decide if they can support it.
The basic idea I had is similar to what Ben described. Basically the
vlan_etype can be used to determine the Ethertype for the VLAN to be
compared. The reason for this is specifically the VLAN 0 case since
without the VLAN Ethertype check VLAN 0 on ixgbe hardware will match an
untagged frame and that may not be a desired result. As such we can
specify the VLAN Ethertype and then we will only match VLAN tagged
frames without any false hits.
Thanks,
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists