Linux-RDMA Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
To: Mark Zhang <markz@mellanox.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: Alex Rosenbaum <rosenbaumalex@gmail.com>,
	RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
	Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@mellanox.com>,
	Yishai Hadas <yishaih@mellanox.com>,
	Alex Rosenbaum <alexr@mellanox.com>,
	Maor Gottlieb <maorg@mellanox.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] RoCE v2.0 Entropy - IPv6 Flow Label and UDP Source Port
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 09:47:12 -0500
Message-ID: <33f075e2-b5c0-53cd-6954-7ac57eeb008f@talpey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c4fc4449-94ed-805e-76d1-6ce856a4fc05@mellanox.com>

On 2/19/2020 8:04 PM, Mark Zhang wrote:
> On 2/20/2020 1:41 AM, Tom Talpey wrote:
>> On 2/19/2020 8:06 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 02:06:28AM +0000, Mark Zhang wrote:
>>>> The symmetry is important when calculate flow_label with DstQPn/SrcQPn
>>>> for non-RDMA CM Service ID (check the first mail), so that the server
>>>> and client will have same flow_label and udp_sport. But looks like it is
>>>> not important in this case.
>>>
>>> If the application needs a certain flow label it should not rely on
>>> auto-generation, IMHO.
>>>
>>> I expect most networks will not be reversible anyhow, even with the
>>> same flow label?
>>
>> These are network flow labels, not under application control. If they
>> are under application control, that's a security issue.
>>
> 
> As Jason said application is able to control it in ipv6. Besides
> application is also able to control it for non-RDMA CM Service ID in ipv4.

Ok, well I guess that's a separate issue, let's not rathole on
it here then.

> Hi Jason, same flow label get same UDP source port, with same UDP source
> port (along with same sIP/dIP/sPort), are networks reversible?
> 
>> But I agree, if the symmetric behavior is not needed, it should be
>> ignored and a better (more uniformly distributed) hash should be chosen.
>>
>> I definitely like the simplicity and perfect flatness of the newly
>> proposed (src * 31) + dst. But that "31" causes overflow into bit 21,
>> doesn't it? (31 * 0xffff == 0x1f0000) >
> 
> I think overflow doesn't matter? We have overflow anyway if
> multiplicative is used.

Hmm, it does seem to matter because dropping bits tilts the
distribution curve. Plugging ((src * 31) + dst) & 0xFFFFF into
my little test shows some odd behaviors. It starts out flat,
then the collisions start to rise around 49000, leveling out
at 65000 to a value roughly double the initial one (528 -> 1056).
It sits there until 525700, where it falls back to the start
value (528). I don't think this is optimal :-)

Tom.

  reply index

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-08 14:26 Alex Rosenbaum
2020-01-15  9:48 ` Mark Zhang
2020-02-06 14:18 ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-06 14:35   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-06 14:39   ` Alex Rosenbaum
2020-02-06 15:19     ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-08  9:58       ` Alex Rosenbaum
2020-02-12 15:47         ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-13 11:03           ` Alex Rosenbaum
2020-02-13 15:26             ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-13 15:41               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-14 14:23                 ` Mark Zhang
2020-02-15  6:27                   ` Mark Zhang
2020-02-18 14:16                     ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-18 17:41                       ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-19  1:51                         ` Mark Zhang
2020-02-19  2:01                           ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-19  2:06                             ` Mark Zhang
2020-02-19 13:06                               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-19 17:41                                 ` Tom Talpey
2020-02-19 17:55                                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-20  1:04                                   ` Mark Zhang
2020-02-21 14:47                                     ` Tom Talpey [this message]
2020-02-25 13:20                                       ` Alex Rosenbaum

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=33f075e2-b5c0-53cd-6954-7ac57eeb008f@talpey.com \
    --to=tom@talpey.com \
    --cc=alexr@mellanox.com \
    --cc=eranbe@mellanox.com \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=leonro@mellanox.com \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maorg@mellanox.com \
    --cc=markz@mellanox.com \
    --cc=rosenbaumalex@gmail.com \
    --cc=yishaih@mellanox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Linux-RDMA Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/0 linux-rdma/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-rdma linux-rdma/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma \
		linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-rdma

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-rdma


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git