| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2019 11:18:59 +0800
From: wenxu <wenxu@...oud.cn>
To: Paul Blakey <paulb@...lanox.com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Question about flow table offload in mlx5e
Hi Paul,
Thanks for your fix, I will test it.
On 12/8/2019 5:39 PM, Paul Blakey wrote:
> Here's the temp fix:
>
>
> The problem is TC + FT offload, and this revealed a bug in the driver.
>
> For the tunnel test, we changed tc block offload to ft callback, and
> didn't change the indr block offload.
>
> So the tunnel unset rule is offloaded from indr tc callback (it's
> indirect because it's on tun1 device):
>
> mlx5e_rep_indr_setup_block_cb
Maybe It should add a "mlx5e_rep_indr_setup_ft_cb" makes the FT offload can support the indr setup?
Or all indr setup through TC offload?
>
> this offloaded the rule to hardware in the TC domain.
>
> Now the tunnel set (encap) rule was offloaded to FT domain.
>
>
> Since TC comes before FT in software, we should have connected the miss
> on TC domain to FT domain,
>
> but this didn't work.
>
> The below fix should fix that connection:
>
>
> ------------------------------------------
>
>
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/fs_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/fs_core.c
> @@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ static struct mlx5_flow_table
> *find_closest_ft_recursive(struct fs_node *root,
> struct fs_node *iter = list_entry(start, struct fs_node, list);
> struct mlx5_flow_table *ft = NULL;
>
> - if (!root || root->type == FS_TYPE_PRIO_CHAINS)
> - return NULL;
> -
> list_for_each_advance_continue(iter, &root->children, reverse) {
> if (iter->type == FS_TYPE_FLOW_TABLE) {
> fs_get_obj(ft, iter);
> @@ -792,7 +789,10 @@ static struct mlx5_flow_table
> *find_closest_ft(struct fs_prio *prio, bool revers
> parent = prio->node.parent;
> curr_node = &prio->node;
> while (!ft && parent) {
> - ft = find_closest_ft_recursive(parent, &curr_node->list,
> reverse);
> + if (parent->type != FS_TYPE_PRIO_CHAINS)
> + ft = find_closest_ft_recursive(parent,
> + &curr_node->list,
> + reverse);
> curr_node = parent;
> parent = curr_node->parent;
> }
>
>
> ------------------------------------------
>
>
> I will do this patch for upstream if needed after our last patchset that
> also touched this area.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul.
>
>
>
>
> On 12/5/2019 5:17 PM, Paul Blakey wrote:
>> On 12/2/2019 5:37 AM, wenxu wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for trouble you again. I think it is a problem in ft callback.
>>>
>>> Can your help me fix it. Thx!
>>>
>>> I did the test like you with route tc rules to ft callback.
>>>
>>> # ifconfig mlx_p0 172.168.152.75/24 up
>>> # ip n r 172.16.152.241 lladdr fa:fa:ff:ff:ff:ff dev mlx_p0
>>>
>>> # ip l add dev tun1 type gretap external
>>> # tc qdisc add dev tun1 ingress
>>> # tc qdisc add dev mlx_pf0vf0 ingress
>>>
>>> # tc filter add dev mlx_pf0vf0 pref 2 ingress protocol ip flower
>>> skip_sw action tunnel_key set dst_ip 172.168.152.241 src_ip 0 id
>>> 1000 nocsum pipe action mirred egress redirect dev tun1
>>>
>>>
>>> In The vm:
>>> # ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.75/24 up
>>> # ip n r 10.0.0.77 lladdr fa:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff dev eth0
>>>
>>> # iperf -c 10.0.0.77 -t 100 -i 2
>>>
>>> The syn packets can be offloaded successfully.
>>>
>>> # # tc -s filter ls dev mlx_pf0vf0 ingress
>>> filter protocol ip pref 2 flower chain 0
>>> filter protocol ip pref 2 flower chain 0 handle 0x1
>>> eth_type ipv4
>>> skip_sw
>>> in_hw in_hw_count 1
>>> action order 1: tunnel_key set
>>> src_ip 0.0.0.0
>>> dst_ip 172.168.152.241
>>> key_id 1000
>>> nocsum pipe
>>> index 1 ref 1 bind 1 installed 252 sec used 252 sec
>>> Action statistics:
>>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>>
>>> action order 2: mirred (Egress Redirect to device tun1) stolen
>>> index 1 ref 1 bind 1 installed 252 sec used 110 sec
>>> Action statistics:
>>> Sent 3420 bytes 11 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>>> Sent software 0 bytes 0 pkt
>>> Sent hardware 3420 bytes 11 pkt
>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>>
>>> But Then I add another decap filter on tun1:
>>>
>>> tc filter add dev tun1 pref 2 ingress protocol ip flower enc_key_id
>>> 1000 enc_src_ip 172.168.152.241 action tunnel_key unset pipe action
>>> mirred egress redirect dev mlx_pf0vf0
>>>
>>> # iperf -c 10.0.0.77 -t 100 -i 2
>>>
>>> The syn packets can't be offloaded. The tc filter counter is also not
>>> increase.
>>>
>>>
>>> # tc -s filter ls dev mlx_pf0vf0 ingress
>>> filter protocol ip pref 2 flower chain 0
>>> filter protocol ip pref 2 flower chain 0 handle 0x1
>>> eth_type ipv4
>>> skip_sw
>>> in_hw in_hw_count 1
>>> action order 1: tunnel_key set
>>> src_ip 0.0.0.0
>>> dst_ip 172.168.152.241
>>> key_id 1000
>>> nocsum pipe
>>> index 1 ref 1 bind 1 installed 320 sec used 320 sec
>>> Action statistics:
>>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>>
>>> action order 2: mirred (Egress Redirect to device tun1) stolen
>>> index 1 ref 1 bind 1 installed 320 sec used 178 sec
>>> Action statistics:
>>> Sent 3420 bytes 11 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>>> Sent software 0 bytes 0 pkt
>>> Sent hardware 3420 bytes 11 pkt
>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>>
>>> # tc -s filter ls dev tun1 ingress
>>> filter protocol ip pref 2 flower chain 0
>>> filter protocol ip pref 2 flower chain 0 handle 0x1
>>> eth_type ipv4
>>> enc_src_ip 172.168.152.241
>>> enc_key_id 1000
>>> in_hw in_hw_count 1
>>> action order 1: tunnel_key unset pipe
>>> index 2 ref 1 bind 1 installed 391 sec used 391 sec
>>> Action statistics:
>>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>>
>>> action order 2: mirred (Egress Redirect to device mlx_pf0vf0) stolen
>>> index 2 ref 1 bind 1 installed 391 sec used 391 sec
>>> Action statistics:
>>> Sent 0 bytes 0 pkt (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0)
>>> backlog 0b 0p requeues 0
>>>
>>>
>>> So there maybe some problem for ft callback setup. When there is
>>> another reverse
>>> decap rule add in tunnel device, The encap rule will not offloaded
>>> the packets.
>>>
>>> Expect your help Thx!
>>>
>>>
>>> BR
>>> wenxu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Hi I reproduced it.
>>
>> I'll find the reason and fix for it and get back to you soon.
>>
>> We are planing on expanding our chain and prio supported range, and in
>> that we also move the FT offload code a bit.
>>
>> If what I think happens happened it would fix it anyway.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists