Message-ID: <e666e0cb-5b65-1fe9-61ae-a3a3cea54ea0@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:50:09 -0600
From:   Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
To:     Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     "bjorn.andersson@...aro.org" <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Port mirroring, v2 (RFC)

This is a second RFC for a design to implement new functionality

in the Qualcomm IPA driver.  Since last time I've looked into some

options based on feedback.  This time I'll provide some more detail

about the hardware, and what the feature is doing.  And I'll end

with two possible implementations, and some questions.



My objective is to get a general sense that what I plan to do

is reasonable, so the patches that implement it will be acceptable.





The feature provides the AP access to information about the packets

that the IPA hardware processes as it carries them between its

"ports".  It is intended as a debug/informational interface only.

Before going further I'll briefly explain what the IPA hardware

does.



The upstream driver currently uses the hardware only as the path

that provides access to a 5G/LTE cellular network via a modem

embedded in a Qualcomm SoC.



        \|/

         |

   ------+-----   ------

   | 5G Modem |   | AP |

   ------------   ------

              \\    || <-- IPA channels, or "ports"

             -----------

             |   IPA   |

             -----------


But the hardware also provides a path to carry network traffic to

and from other entities as well, such as a PCIe root complex (or

endpoint).  For example an M.2 WiFi card can use a PCIe slot that

is IPA connected, and the IPA hardware can carry packets between

the AP and that WiFi card.  (A separate MHI host driver manages the

interaction between PCIe and IPA in this case.)



        \|/                PCIe bus --.     \|/

         |                            |      |

   ------+-----  ------   ----------- v ------+-----

   | 5G Modem |  | AP |...| PCIe RC |===| M.2 WiFi |

   ------------  ------   -----------   ------------

              \\   ||    // <-- IPA channels

               -----------

               |   IPA   |

               -----------



In the above scenario, the IPA hardware is actually able to directly

route packets between the embedded modem and the WiFi card without

AP involvement.  But supporting that is a future problem, and I

don't want to get ahead of myself.



The point is that the IPA hardware can carry network packets between

any pair of its "ports".  And the AP can get information about all

of the traffic the IPA handles, using a special interface.



The "information" consists of replicas of each packet transferred

(possibly truncated), each preceded by a fixed-size "status" header.

It amounts to a stream of packets delivered by the IPA hardware to

the AP.  This stream is distinct from "normal" traffic (such as

packets exchanged between the AP and modem); but note that even

those packets would be replicated.





I originally described this feature as "port mirroring" because it

seemed to be similar to that feature of smart network switches.  But

the "mirroring" term was interpreted as a something Linux would do,

so at a minimum, that's the wrong term.  Andrew Lunn (and others)

suggested that WiFi monitor mode might be a good model.  I looked

into that, and I don't think that quite fits either.  I really think

this should be represented separate from the "normal" network

devices associated with IPA.





Below I will describe two possible implementations I'm considering.

I would like to know which approach makes the most sense (or if

neither does, what alternative would be better).  On top of that I

guess I'd like suggestions for the *name* for this (i.e., what

should I call the interface that implements this?).



The two alternative implementations I'm considering are a network

device, and a "misc" (character) device.  In both cases, a user

space program would open the interface and read from it.  The data

read would just be the raw data received--a stream of the (possibly

truncated) packets together with their "status" headers.  I envision

either one could be a source of packets processed by libpcap/tcpdump.



My preference is to use a network device.  I think it fits the

"stream of packets" best, and existing networking code would take

care of all the details of queueing and packet management.  One down

side is that this is not a "normal" network interface--there is no

reason to associate it with an IP stack, for example.



A misc device would avoid the interface being treated as a "normal"

network device.  It could present all packet data to user space, but

the IPA driver would have to manage buffering, including limiting

the amount of received buffers.  Implementing this would be fine,

but I think it would just be nicer to use the network model.





So bottom line, given what I've described above:

- Is a distinct network device a reasonable and acceptable way of

   implementing this feature?  If not, why not?

- Would implementing this as a misc device be preferable?  Why?

- Is there a better alternative than either of the above?

- Can anyone suggest a name for this functionality, something that

   is meaningful but would not be confused with other existing terms?



Thanks.


					-Alex

Powered by blists - more mailing lists