Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Mon, 20 Nov 2023 13:02:22 +0100 | Subject | Re: [net PATCH] octeontx2-pf: Fix ntuple rule creation to direct packet to VF with higher Rx queue than its PF | From | Wojciech Drewek <> |
| |
On 20.11.2023 06:51, Suman Ghosh wrote: > It is possible to add a ntuple rule which would like to direct packet to > a VF whose number of queues are greater/less than its PF's queue numbers. > For example a PF can have 2 Rx queues but a VF created on that PF can have > 8 Rx queues. As of today, ntuple rule will reject rule because it is > checking the requested queue number against PF's number of Rx queues. > As a part of this fix if the action of a ntuple rule is to move a packet > to a VF's queue then the check is removed. Also, a debug information is > printed to aware user that it is user's responsibility to cross check if > the requested queue number on that VF is a valid one. > > Fixes: f0a1913f8a6f ("octeontx2-pf: Add support for ethtool ntuple filters") > Signed-off-by: Suman Ghosh <sumang@marvell.com> > --- > .../marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c > index 4762dbea64a1..4200f2d387f6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_flows.c > @@ -1088,6 +1088,7 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct ethtool_rxnfc *nfc) > struct ethhdr *eth_hdr; > bool new = false; > int err = 0; > + u64 vf_num; > u32 ring; > > if (!flow_cfg->max_flows) { > @@ -1100,9 +1101,26 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct ethtool_rxnfc *nfc) > if (!(pfvf->flags & OTX2_FLAG_NTUPLE_SUPPORT)) > return -ENOMEM; > > + /* Number of queues on a VF can be greater or less than > + * the PF's queue. Hence no need to check for the > + * queue count. Hence no need to check queue count if PF > + * is installing for its VF. Below is the expected vf_num value > + * based on the ethtool commands. > + * > + * e.g. > + * 1. ethtool -U <netdev> ... action -1 ==> vf_num:255 > + * 2. ethtool -U <netdev> ... action <queue_num> ==> vf_num:0 > + * 3. ethtool -U <netdev> ... vf <vf_idx> queue <queue_num> ==> > + * vf_num:vf_idx+1 > + */ > + vf_num = ethtool_get_flow_spec_ring_vf(fsp->ring_cookie); > + if (!is_otx2_vf(pfvf->pcifunc) && vf_num) > + goto bypass_queue_check;
Let's just add this condition to the next if, no need for goto.
> + > if (ring >= pfvf->hw.rx_queues && fsp->ring_cookie != RX_CLS_FLOW_DISC) > return -EINVAL; > > +bypass_queue_check: > if (fsp->location >= otx2_get_maxflows(flow_cfg)) > return -EINVAL; > > @@ -1182,6 +1200,9 @@ int otx2_add_flow(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct ethtool_rxnfc *nfc) > flow_cfg->nr_flows++; > } > > + if (flow->is_vf) > + netdev_info(pfvf->netdev, > + "Make sure that VF's queue number is within its queue limit\n"); > return 0; > } >
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |