Message-ID: <20220413121159.GB12128@noodle>
Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 15:11:59 +0300
From:   Boris Sukholitko <boris.sukholitko@...adcom.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "Gustavo A . R . Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        zhang kai <zhangkaiheb@....com>,
        Yoshiki Komachi <komachi.yoshiki@...il.com>,
        Ilya Lifshits <ilya.lifshits@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/5] net/sched: flower: Consider the number
 of tags for vlan filters

On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 01:44:56PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 10:14:17AM CEST, boris.sukholitko@...adcom.com wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 04:17:01PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 03:16:10PM CEST, boris.sukholitko@...adcom.com wrote:
> >> >On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 02:12:15PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> >> Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 01:40:49PM CEST, boris.sukholitko@...adcom.com wrote:
> >> >> >On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 01:09:35PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> >> >> Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:02:36PM CEST, boris.sukholitko@...adcom.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >Currently the existence of vlan filters is conditional on the vlan
> >> >> >> >protocol being matched in the tc rule. I.e. the following rule:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >is illegal because we lack protocol 802.1q in the rule.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Having the num_of_vlans filter configured removes this restriction. The
> >> >> >> >following rule becomes ok:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >because we know that the packet is single tagged.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >We achieve the above by having is_vlan_key helper look at the number of
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> Sorry to be a nitpicker, but who's "we"? When I read the patch
> >> >> >> description, I need to understand clearly what the patch is doing, which
> >> >> >> is not this case. You suppose to command the codebase what to do.
> >> >> >> I fail to see that :/
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What do you think of the following description? The description consists
> >> >> >of two parts: the first provides motivation for the patch, the second is
> >> >> >the way the motivation is implemented. I've judiciously edited out the
> >> >> >"we"-word. :)
> >> >> >
> >> >> ><description>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Currently the existence of vlan filters is conditional on the vlan
> >> >> >protocol being matched in the tc rule. I.e. the following rule:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
> >> >> >
> >> >> >is illegal because vlan protocol (e.g. 802.1q) does not appear in the rule.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Having the num_of_vlans filter configured removes this restriction. The
> >> >> >following rule becomes ok:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
> >> >> 
> >> >> So this is what this patch allows?
> >> >
> >> >Yes.
> >> >
> >> >> You are talking about it as it is
> >> >> already possible with the code before this patch being applied.
> >> >> 
> >> >
> >> >Sorry for the confusion. In the updated description I try to make the
> >> >distinction much clearer.
> >> >
> >> >> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >because having num_of_vlans==1 implies that the packet is single tagged.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >To make the above possible, is_vlan_key helper is changed to look at the
> >> >> >number of vlans in addition to the vlan ethertype.
> >> >> 
> >> >> What "is changed"? You should tell the codebase what to do, what toadd,
> >> >> remove or change. If you did that, it would be very clear to the reader
> >> >> what the patch is supposed to do.
> >> >> 
> >> >
> >> >The "changed" refers to the code of is_vlan_key function which is
> >> >changed by this patch. Please see the updated description.
> >> >
> >> >> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Outer tag vlan filters (e.g.  vlan_prio) require the number of vlan tags
> >> >> >be greater than 0. Inner filters (e.g. cvlan_prio) require the number of
> >> >> >vlan tags be greater than 1.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Again, unclear what this describes, if the current code before the patch
> >> >> or the state after this patch.
> >> >> 
> >> >
> >> >What about the following:
> >> >
> >> ><description>
> >> >
> >> >Before this commit the existence of vlan filters was conditional on the vlan
> >> >protocol being matched in the tc rule. For example, the following rule:
> >> >
> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
> >> >
> >> >was illegal because vlan protocol (e.g. 802.1q) does not appear in the rule.
> >> >
> >> >This commit removes the above restriction. Having the num_of_vlans
> >> 
> >> Say rather just "Remove the above restriction. ..."
> >> 
> >> 
> >> >filter configured allows further matching on vlan attributes. The
> >> >following rule is ok now:
> >> >
> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
> >> >
> >> >because having num_of_vlans==1 implies that the packet is single tagged.
> >> >
> >> >To do this, this commit changes is_vlan_key helper to look at the number
> >> 
> >> "Change the is_vlan_key helper to look..."
> >> 
> >> Don't talk about "this commit".
> >> 
> >
> >OK. The following incorporates both of the above suggestions:
> >
> ><description>
> >
> >Before this commit the existence of vlan filters was conditional on the vlan
> >protocol being matched in the tc rule. For example, the following rule:
> >
> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
> >
> >was illegal because vlan protocol (e.g. 802.1q) does not appear in the rule.
> >
> >Remove the above restriction by looking at the num_of_vlans filter to
> >allow further matching on vlan attributes. The following rule is ok now:
> 
> What's "now"?

"Now" is the situation after applying the patch. I'll mention this fact
in the description below.

> 
> 
> >
> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
> >
> >because having num_of_vlans==1 implies that the packet is single tagged.
> >
> >Change is_vlan_key helper to look at the number of vlans in addition to
> >the vlan ethertype. Outer (e.g. vlan_prio) and inner (e.g.  cvlan_prio)
> >tag vlan filters require the number of vlan tags to be greater then 0
> >and 1 accordingly.
> 
> I don't get this last sentence. "filters require". Do you do the change
> or are you stating what's in before the patch?
> 

The whole paragraph starting with "Change..." talks about what happens
after the patch. I'll make it more explicit in the description below.

The updated description follows:

<description>

Before this commit the existence of vlan filters was conditional on the vlan
protocol being matched in the tc rule. For example, the following rule:

tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5

was illegal because vlan protocol (e.g. 802.1q) does not appear in the rule.

Remove the above restriction by looking at the num_of_vlans filter to
allow further matching on vlan attributes. The following rule becomes
legal as a result of this commit:

tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5

because having num_of_vlans==1 implies that the packet is single tagged.

Change is_vlan_key helper to look at the number of vlans in addition to
the vlan ethertype. The outcome of this change is that outer (e.g. vlan_prio)
and inner (e.g. cvlan_prio) tag vlan filters require the number of vlan
tags to be greater then 0 and 1 accordingly.

As a result of is_vlan_key change, the ethertype may be set to 0 when
matching on the number of vlans. Update fl_set_key_vlan to avoid setting
key, mask vlan_tpid for the 0 ethertype.

</description>

Thanks,
Boris.

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (4221 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists