netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKgT0UchtULE4YT30JQbORS6O=g20cjkmodX7UHkn6E-N9jxrA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Mar 2018 11:07:12 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:     Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Cc:     "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>,
        "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus" <jesus.sanchez-palencia@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
 support for ethtool nftuple filters

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Vinicius Costa Gomes
<vinicius.gomes@...el.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Brown, Aaron F <aaron.f.brown@...el.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces@...osl.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
>>>> To: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
>>>> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus <jesus.sanchez-
>>>> palencia@...el.com>
>>>> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
>>>> support for ethtool nftuple filters
>>>>
>>>> This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
>>>> packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.
>>>>
>>>> In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
>>>> characterized by these examples:
>>>>
>>>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
>>>> (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
>>>> to the RX queue 0)
>>>>
>>>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
>>>> (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
>>>> the RX queue 3)
>>>
>>> This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set the rx filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the packets to the queue I request.
>>>
>>> With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be effected by setting the filter.  In the case of i211 the rx packets stay on rx_queue 0 with or without an ether src or dst filter.  The first example one seems to work at first since it's directing to queue 0, but changing the filter to "action 1" does not change the behavior.  With the i350 and i354 ports the packets are spread across the rx_queues with or without the filter set.
>>
>> Do any of the other parts actually support this functionality? I don't
>> think they do.
>
> From what I can see, the only other part that supports queue steering (by MAC
> addresses) is the 82575. But as I don't have any of those handy, making
> it work only for the i210 seems more reasonable, to avoid getting into
> this situation again.

That sounds good to me. What you might do is add a comment explaining
that this is only supported on 82575 and i210 wherever you put the
check that limits this. Then if we have time for the
development/validation efforts, or someone in the community does they
could take it upon themselves to enable and test it for 82575.

I have done similar things in the past. As long as it is clear that
the reason why we limited it to i210 is mostly because of
development/validation resources somebody else can come along and
enable it if they have the resources and time to invest in doing so.