netdev - Re: htb offload on vlan (mlx5)

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:59:40 +0100
From:   Stanisław Czech <s.czech@...atel.com>
To:     Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxtram95@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: htb offload on vlan (mlx5)

06.03.2023  10:35, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
> That's expected, vlan_features doesn't contain NETIF_F_HW_TC, and I
> think that's the case for all drivers. Regarding HTB offload, I don't
> think the current implementation in mlx5e can be easily modified to
> support being attached to a VLAN only, because the current
> implementation relies on objects created globally in the NIC.
>
> CCed Nvidia folks in case they have more comments.
>

Thank you for you answer Maxim... I tried to use SR IOV and use the HTB 
offload functionality on the VF
but it's not possible either:

ethtool -K enp1s0np0 hw-tc-offload  on
echo 7 > /sys/class/infiniband/mlx5_0/device/mlx5_num_vfs
ethtool -K enp1s0f7v6 hw-tc-offload  on

ip l s dev enp1s0np0 name eth0
ip l s dev eth0 vf 6 vlan 4

and I see in
ethtool -k eth0
hw-tc-offload: on

but still:
Error: mlx5_core: Missing QoS capabilities. Try disabling SRIOV or use a 
supported device.

So I guess there is no way to use HTB offloading anywhere else than on 
the PF device itself...

Anyway, maybe using multiple VFS to support multiple VLANs (single VF 
for single vlan) would
be more efficent than simple vlans on PF interface (regarding qdisc lock 
problem) ?
I would like to utilize more CPU cores as the vlans on a single PF 
interface use only a single
cpu core ( the 100% ksoftirqd problem)

Could this be some workaround?

Greetings,
*Stanisław Czech*