From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shahaf Shuler Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] net/mlx5: use Netlink to add/remove MAC addresses Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 07:34:50 +0000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio_Laranjeiro?= , "Adrien Mazarguil" , Yongseok Koh Return-path: Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db5eur01on0082.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.2.82]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552DB728A for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:34:52 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Nelio, Wednesday, March 21, 2018 3:40 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro: > VF devices are not able to receive traffic unless it fully requests it th= ough > Netlink. This will cause the request to be processed by the PF which wil= l > add/remove the MAC address to the VF table if the VF is trusted. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro > Acked-by: Adrien Mazarguil > --- > drivers/net/mlx5/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.c | 22 ++ > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h | 13 + > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c | 27 +++ > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mac.c | 25 +- > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_nl.c | 530 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h index > faacfd9d6..6a7e9f310 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h > @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct mlx5_dev_config { > unsigned int hw_vlan_strip:1; /* VLAN stripping is supported. */ > unsigned int hw_fcs_strip:1; /* FCS stripping is supported. */ > unsigned int hw_padding:1; /* End alignment padding is supported. > */ > + unsigned int vf:1; /* This is a VF. */ > unsigned int mps:2; /* Multi-packet send supported mode. */ > unsigned int tunnel_en:1; > /* Whether tunnel stateless offloads are supported. */ @@ -154,6 > +155,8 @@ struct priv { > struct mlx5_dev_config config; /* Device configuration. */ > struct mlx5_verbs_alloc_ctx verbs_alloc_ctx; > /* Context for Verbs allocator. */ > + int nl_socket; /* Netlink socket. */ > + uint32_t nl_sn; /* Netlink message sequence number. */ > }; >=20 > /* mlx5.c */ > @@ -163,6 +166,7 @@ int mlx5_getenv_int(const char *); > /* mlx5_ethdev.c */ >=20 > int mlx5_get_ifname(const struct rte_eth_dev *dev, char > (*ifname)[IF_NAMESIZE]); > +int mlx5_ifindex(const struct rte_eth_dev *dev); > int mlx5_ifreq(const struct rte_eth_dev *dev, int req, struct ifreq *ifr= ); int > mlx5_get_mtu(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t *mtu); int > mlx5_set_flags(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, unsigned int keep, @@ -297,4 > +301,13 @@ struct mlx5_mr *mlx5_mr_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct > rte_mempool *mp); int mlx5_mr_release(struct mlx5_mr *mr); int > mlx5_mr_verify(struct rte_eth_dev *dev); >=20 > +/* mlx5_nl.c */ > + > +int mlx5_nl_init(uint32_t nlgroups); > +int mlx5_nl_mac_addr_add(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct ether_addr > +*mac); int mlx5_nl_mac_addr_remove(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct > +ether_addr *mac); void mlx5_nl_mac_addr_flush(struct rte_eth_dev > *dev); I think the two below should be introduced only on the next patch of the se= ries.=20 > +int mlx5_nl_promisc(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, int enable); int > +mlx5_nl_allmulti(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, int enable); > + > #endif /* RTE_PMD_MLX5_H_ */ [...] > +/** > + * Flush all added MAC addresses. > + * > + * @param dev > + * Pointer to Ethernet device. > + */ > +void > +mlx5_nl_mac_addr_flush(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) { > + int i; > + const struct ether_addr mac_null =3D { .addr_bytes =3D { 0 }, }; > + > + for (i =3D MLX5_MAX_MAC_ADDRESSES - 1; i >=3D 0; --i) { > + struct ether_addr *m =3D &dev->data->mac_addrs[i]; > + > + if (memcmp(&mac_null, m, ETHER_ADDR_LEN)) > + mlx5_nl_mac_addr_remove(dev, m); > + } > +} What if the DPDK process is terminated ungracefully? I think the MAC table = will remain with all the MACs which were added.=20 The next run of the process may have un-expected results. Should we flush the neighbor mac table also on probe to make sure only the = VF mac exists?=20 > -- > 2.11.0