[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190523102513.363c2557@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 10:25:13 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Cong Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
Vishal Kulkarni <vishal@...lsio.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/3] flow_offload: Re-add per-action
statistics
On Thu, 23 May 2019 17:40:08 +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
> On 23/05/2019 17:11, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 May 2019 09:19:49 -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> >> That would still work here, no? There will be some latency
> >> based on the frequency of hardware->kernel stats updates.
> > I don't think so, I think the stats are only updated on classifier
> > dumps in Ed's code.
> Yep currently that's the case, but not as an inherent restriction (see
> my other mail).
I think we can all agree that the current stats offload only reporting
up-to-date HW stats when classifiers are dumped makes slight mockery of
the kernel API guarantees. I feel like HW vendors found a subset of
the ABI to poke things in and out of the hardware, and things work
correctly if you limit yourself to that very subset. So you only get
up-to-date stats if you dump classifiers, if you dump actions - no dice.
Whether it's on you to fix this is debatable :) Since you're diving
into actions and adding support for shared ones, I'd say it's time to
rectify the situation.
Let's look at it this way - if you fix the RTM_GETACTION you will
necessarily add the cookie and all the other stuff you need in your
upcoming driver :)
> > But we can't be 100% sure without seeing driver code.
> Would it help if I posted my driver code to the list? It's gonna be
> upstream eventually anyway, it's just that the driver as a whole
> isn't really in a shape to be merged just yet (mainly 'cos the
> hardware folks are planning some breaking changes). But I can post
> my TC handling code, or even the whole driver, if demonstrating how
> these interfaces can be used will help matters.
From my perspective - you answered the question so I'm at 100% now ;)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists