XDP hardware hints discussion mail archive
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>,
	bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>,
	Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
	Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>,
	Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@gmail.com>,
	Maryam Tahhan <mtahhan@redhat.com>,
	xdp-hints@xdp-project.net,
	Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>
Subject: [xdp-hints] Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 12/21] xdp: Add checksum hint
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2023 09:13:02 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <64c661de227c2_11bfb629493@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQ+vn0=1UT5_c628ovq+LzfrNFf0MxmZn++NqeUFJ-ykQw@mail.gmail.com>

Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 9:15 AM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 07:39:14PM +0200, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +union xdp_csum_info {
> > > > +   /* Checksum referred to by ``csum_start + csum_offset`` is considered
> > > > +    * valid, but was never calculated, TX device has to do this,
> > > > +    * starting from csum_start packet byte.
> > > > +    * Any preceding checksums are also considered valid.
> > > > +    * Available, if ``status == XDP_CHECKSUM_PARTIAL``.
> > > > +    */
> > > > +   struct {
> > > > +           u16 csum_start;
> > > > +           u16 csum_offset;
> > > > +   };
> > > > +
> > >
> > > CHECKSUM_PARTIAL makes sense on TX, but this RX. I don't see in the above.
> >
> > It can be observed on RX when packets are looped.
> >
> > This may be observed even in XDP on veth.
> 
> veth and XDP is a broken combination. GSO packets coming out of containers
> cannot be parsed properly by XDP.
> It was added mainly for testing. Just like "generic XDP".
> bpf progs at skb layer is much better fit for veth.

Ok. Still, seems forward looking and little cost to define the
constant?
 
> > > > +   /* Checksum, calculated over the whole packet.
> > > > +    * Available, if ``status & XDP_CHECKSUM_COMPLETE``.
> > > > +    */
> > > > +   u32 checksum;
> > >
> > > imo XDP RX should only support XDP_CHECKSUM_COMPLETE with u32 checksum
> > > or XDP_CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY.
> > >
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +enum xdp_csum_status {
> > > > +   /* HW had parsed several transport headers and validated their
> > > > +    * checksums, same as ``CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY`` in ``sk_buff``.
> > > > +    * 3 least significant bytes contain number of consecutive checksums,
> > > > +    * starting with the outermost, reported by hardware as valid.
> > > > +    * ``sk_buff`` checksum level (``csum_level``) notation is provided
> > > > +    * for driver developers.
> > > > +    */
> > > > +   XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID_LVL0         = 1,    /* 1 outermost checksum */
> > > > +   XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID_LVL1         = 2,    /* 2 outermost checksums */
> > > > +   XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID_LVL2         = 3,    /* 3 outermost checksums */
> > > > +   XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID_LVL3         = 4,    /* 4 outermost checksums */
> > > > +   XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID_NUM_MASK     = GENMASK(2, 0),
> > > > +   XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID              = XDP_CHECKSUM_VALID_NUM_MASK,
> > >
> > > I don't see what bpf prog suppose to do with these levels.
> > > The driver should pick between 3:
> > > XDP_CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY, XDP_CHECKSUM_COMPLETE, XDP_CHECKSUM_NONE.
> > >
> > > No levels and no anything partial. please.
> >
> > This levels business is an unfortunate side effect of
> > CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY. For a packet with multiple checksum fields, what
> > does the boolean actually mean? With these levels, at least that is
> > well defined: the first N checksum fields.
> 
> If I understand this correctly this is intel specific feature that
> other NICs don't have. skb layer also doesn't have such concept.
> The driver should say CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY when it's sure
> or don't pretend that it checks the checksum and just say NONE.

I did not know how much this was used, but quick grep for non constant
csum_level shows devices from at least six vendors.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-30 13:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-28 15:44 [xdp-hints] (no subject) Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 01/21] ice: make RX hash reading code more reusable Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/21] ice: make RX HW timestamp " Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/21] ice: make RX checksum checking " Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/21] ice: Make ptype internal to descriptor info processing Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 05/21] ice: Introduce ice_xdp_buff Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/21] ice: Support HW timestamp hint Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/21] ice: Support RX hash XDP hint Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/21] ice: Support XDP hints in AF_XDP ZC mode Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 09/21] xdp: Add VLAN tag hint Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 10/21] ice: Implement " Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 11/21] ice: use VLAN proto from ring packet context in skb path Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 12/21] xdp: Add checksum hint Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 21:53   ` [xdp-hints] " Alexei Starovoitov
2023-07-29 16:15     ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-07-29 18:04       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-07-30 13:13         ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2023-07-31 10:52           ` Larysa Zaremba
2023-08-01  1:03             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-02 13:27               ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-08-07 15:03                 ` Larysa Zaremba
2023-08-07 15:32               ` Larysa Zaremba
2023-08-07 17:06                 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2023-07-31 16:43           ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-08-07 15:08             ` Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 13/21] ice: Implement " Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 21:02   ` [xdp-hints] " kernel test robot
2023-07-28 21:02   ` kernel test robot
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 14/21] selftests/bpf: Allow VLAN packets in xdp_hw_metadata Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 15/21] net, xdp: allow metadata > 32 Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 16/21] selftests/bpf: Add flags and new hints to xdp_hw_metadata Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 17/21] veth: Implement VLAN tag and checksum XDP hint Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-29 22:13   ` [xdp-hints] " kernel test robot
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 18/21] net: make vlan_get_tag() return -ENODATA instead of -EINVAL Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 19/21] selftests/bpf: Use AF_INET for TX in xdp_metadata Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 20/21] selftests/bpf: Check VLAN tag and proto " Larysa Zaremba
2023-07-28 17:39 ` [xdp-hints] [PATCH bpf-next v4 21/21] selftests/bpf: check checksum state " Larysa Zaremba

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

  List information: https://lists.xdp-project.net/postorius/lists/xdp-hints.xdp-project.net/

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=64c661de227c2_11bfb629493@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
    --to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexandr.lobakin@intel.com \
    --cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=larysa.zaremba@intel.com \
    --cc=magnus.karlsson@gmail.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=mtahhan@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=simon.horman@corigine.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=willemb@google.com \
    --cc=xdp-hints@xdp-project.net \
    --cc=yhs@fb.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox