Message ID | 1611757967-18236-4-git-send-email-paulb@nvidia.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Commit | 6895cb3a95c9988b9556f179dccc1ef693a981f7 |
Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
Headers | show |
Series | net/sched: cls_flower: Add support for matching on ct_state reply flag | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
netdev/cover_letter | success | Link |
netdev/fixes_present | success | Link |
netdev/patch_count | success | Link |
netdev/tree_selection | success | Clearly marked for net-next |
netdev/subject_prefix | success | Link |
netdev/cc_maintainers | warning | 4 maintainers not CCed: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org elibr@mellanox.com leon@kernel.org lariel@nvidia.com |
netdev/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
netdev/verify_signedoff | success | Link |
netdev/module_param | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
netdev/build_32bit | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
netdev/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
netdev/verify_fixes | success | Link |
netdev/checkpatch | success | total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 52 lines checked |
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
netdev/header_inline | success | Link |
netdev/stable | success | Stable not CCed |
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Paul Blakey wrote:
> Add support for matching on ct_state reply flag.
Sorry for the late reply, missed the patchset here. (just noticed
because of the iproute2 patch, thanks for the Cc in there)
Only one question though. Is it safe to assume that this will require
a firmware update as well?
Thanks,
Marcelo
On Tue, 2 Feb 2021, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 04:32:47PM +0200, Paul Blakey wrote: > > Add support for matching on ct_state reply flag. > > Sorry for the late reply, missed the patchset here. (just noticed > because of the iproute2 patch, thanks for the Cc in there) > > Only one question though. Is it safe to assume that this will require > a firmware update as well? No, it will not, there was room for this flag in the register before (as long as you had a firmware recent enough that supported CT feature itself ofc). Paul. > > Thanks, > Marcelo >
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/tc_ct.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/tc_ct.c index e20c1da..68bdf5c 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/tc_ct.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/tc_ct.c @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ #define MLX5_CT_STATE_ESTABLISHED_BIT BIT(1) #define MLX5_CT_STATE_TRK_BIT BIT(2) #define MLX5_CT_STATE_NAT_BIT BIT(3) +#define MLX5_CT_STATE_REPLY_BIT BIT(4) #define MLX5_FTE_ID_BITS (mlx5e_tc_attr_to_reg_mappings[FTEID_TO_REG].mlen * 8) #define MLX5_FTE_ID_MAX GENMASK(MLX5_FTE_ID_BITS - 1, 0) @@ -635,6 +636,7 @@ struct mlx5_ct_entry { } ct_state |= MLX5_CT_STATE_ESTABLISHED_BIT | MLX5_CT_STATE_TRK_BIT; + ct_state |= meta->ct_metadata.orig_dir ? 0 : MLX5_CT_STATE_REPLY_BIT; err = mlx5_tc_ct_entry_set_registers(ct_priv, &mod_acts, ct_state, meta->ct_metadata.mark, @@ -1080,8 +1082,8 @@ void mlx5_tc_ct_match_del(struct mlx5_tc_ct_priv *priv, struct mlx5_ct_attr *ct_ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) { struct flow_rule *rule = flow_cls_offload_flow_rule(f); + bool trk, est, untrk, unest, new, rpl, unrpl; struct flow_dissector_key_ct *mask, *key; - bool trk, est, untrk, unest, new; u32 ctstate = 0, ctstate_mask = 0; u16 ct_state_on, ct_state_off; u16 ct_state, ct_state_mask; @@ -1107,9 +1109,10 @@ void mlx5_tc_ct_match_del(struct mlx5_tc_ct_priv *priv, struct mlx5_ct_attr *ct_ if (ct_state_mask & ~(TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_TRACKED | TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_ESTABLISHED | - TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_NEW)) { + TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_NEW | + TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_REPLY)) { NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, - "only ct_state trk, est and new are supported for offload"); + "only ct_state trk, est, new and rpl are supported for offload"); return -EOPNOTSUPP; } @@ -1118,13 +1121,17 @@ void mlx5_tc_ct_match_del(struct mlx5_tc_ct_priv *priv, struct mlx5_ct_attr *ct_ trk = ct_state_on & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_TRACKED; new = ct_state_on & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_NEW; est = ct_state_on & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_ESTABLISHED; + rpl = ct_state_on & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_REPLY; untrk = ct_state_off & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_TRACKED; unest = ct_state_off & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_ESTABLISHED; + unrpl = ct_state_off & TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_FLAGS_REPLY; ctstate |= trk ? MLX5_CT_STATE_TRK_BIT : 0; ctstate |= est ? MLX5_CT_STATE_ESTABLISHED_BIT : 0; + ctstate |= rpl ? MLX5_CT_STATE_REPLY_BIT : 0; ctstate_mask |= (untrk || trk) ? MLX5_CT_STATE_TRK_BIT : 0; ctstate_mask |= (unest || est) ? MLX5_CT_STATE_ESTABLISHED_BIT : 0; + ctstate_mask |= (unrpl || rpl) ? MLX5_CT_STATE_REPLY_BIT : 0; if (new) { NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack,