[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180227154757.4e5f334a@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:47:57 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
To: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc: <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next 0/2] ntuple filters with RSS
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:59:12 +0000, Edward Cree wrote:
> This series introduces the ability to mark an ethtool steering filter to use
> RSS spreading, and the ability to create and configure multiple RSS contexts
> with different indirection tables, hash keys, and hash fields.
> An implementation for the sfc driver (for 7000-series and later SFC NICs) is
> included in patch 2/2.
>
> The anticipated use case of this feature is for steering traffic destined for
> a container (or virtual machine) to the subset of CPUs on which processes in
> the container (or the VM's vCPUs) are bound, while retaining the scalability
> of RSS spreading from the viewpoint inside the container.
> The use of both a base queue number (ring_cookie) and indirection table is
> intended to allow re-use of a single RSS context to target multiple sets of
> CPUs. For instance, if an 8-core system is hosting three containers on CPUs
> [1,2], [3,4] and [6,7], then a single RSS context with an equal-weight [0,1]
> indirection table could be used to target all three containers by setting
> ring_cookie to 1, 3 and 6 on the respective filters.
Please, let's stop extending ethtool_rx_flow APIs. I bit my tongue
when Intel was adding their "redirection to VF" based on ethtool ntuples
and look now they're adding the same functionality with flower :| And
wonder how to handle two interfaces doing the same thing.
On the use case itself, I wonder how much sense that makes. Can your
hardware not tag the packet as well so you could then mux it to
something like macvlan offload?
CC: Alex, Or
Powered by blists - more mailing lists