[dpdk-dev,v3] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix usage of incorrect port
Checks
Commit Message
When security offload is enabled, the packet should be forwarded on the
port configured in the SA. Security session will be configured on that
port only, and sending the packet on other ports could result in
unencrypted packets being sent out.
This would have performance improvements too, as the per packet LPM
lookup would be avoided for IPsec packets, in inline mode.
Fixes: ec17993a145a ("examples/ipsec-secgw: support security offload")
Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph <anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>
---
v3
* Bug fix (fixed a wrong if condition)
* Minor changes in documentation
v2:
* Updated documentation with the change in behavior for outbound inline
offloaded packets.
doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst | 10 +++-
examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Comments
Hi Anoob,
On 11/15/2017 3:11 PM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
> When security offload is enabled, the packet should be forwarded on the
> port configured in the SA. Security session will be configured on that
> port only, and sending the packet on other ports could result in
> unencrypted packets being sent out.
>
> This would have performance improvements too, as the per packet LPM
> lookup would be avoided for IPsec packets, in inline mode.
>
> Fixes: ec17993a145a ("examples/ipsec-secgw: support security offload")
>
> Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph <anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>
> ---
> v3
> * Bug fix (fixed a wrong if condition)
> * Minor changes in documentation
>
> v2:
> * Updated documentation with the change in behavior for outbound inline
> offloaded packets.
>
> doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst | 10 +++-
> examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst b/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
> index d6cfdbf..ae18acd 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
> @@ -61,6 +61,12 @@ In case of complete protocol offload, the processing of headers(ESP and outer
> IP header) is done by the hardware and the application does not need to
> add/remove them during outbound/inbound processing.
>
> +For inline offloaded outbound traffic, the application will not do the LPM
> +lookup for routing, as the port on which the packet has to be forwarded will be
> +part of the SA. Security parameters will be configured on that port only, and
> +sending the packet on other ports could result in unencrypted packets being
> +sent out.
> +
> The Path for IPsec Inbound traffic is:
>
> * Read packets from the port.
> @@ -543,7 +549,9 @@ where each options means:
> ``<port_id>``
>
> * Port/device ID of the ethernet/crypto accelerator for which the SA is
> - configured. This option is used when *type* is NOT *no-offload*
> + configured. For *inline-crypto-offload* and *inline-protocol-offload*, this
> + port will be used for routing. The routing table will not be referred in
> + this case.
>
> * Optional: No, if *type* is not *no-offload*
>
> diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
> index c98454a..cfcb9d5 100644
> --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
> +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
> @@ -585,31 +585,72 @@ process_pkts_outbound_nosp(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx,
> traffic->ip6.num = nb_pkts_out;
> }
>
> +static inline int32_t
> +get_hop_for_offload_pkt(struct rte_mbuf *pkt)
> +{
> + struct ipsec_mbuf_metadata *priv;
> + struct ipsec_sa *sa;
> +
> + priv = get_priv(pkt);
> +
> + sa = priv->sa;
> + if (unlikely(sa == NULL)) {
> + RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC, "SA not saved in private data\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + return sa->portid;
> +}
> +
> static inline void
> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t nb_pkts)
> {
> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
> uint16_t i, offset;
> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>
> if (nb_pkts == 0)
> return;
>
> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload packets
> + * will have port ID in the SA
> + */
> +
> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
> - uint32_t *, offset);
> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
> + * required to get the hop
> + */
> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
> + uint32_t *, offset);
> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
> + lpm_pkts++;
> + }
> }
>
> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop, nb_pkts);
> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop, lpm_pkts);
> +
> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>
> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
> + /* Read hop from the SA */
> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
> + } else {
> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
> + pkt_hop = -1;
> + }
> +
I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS
if route is success and take the (pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0
check outside the if else block and free the packet if it is unsuccessful.
Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good idea if
we have a flag available for the same.
Others can comment.
> + if (pkt_hop == -1) {
> rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
> continue;
> }
> - send_single_packet(pkts[i], hop[i] & 0xff);
> + send_single_packet(pkts[i], pkt_hop & 0xff);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -619,26 +660,49 @@ route6_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t nb_pkts)
> int32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
> uint8_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2][16];
> uint8_t *ip6_dst;
> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
> uint16_t i, offset;
> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>
> if (nb_pkts == 0)
> return;
>
> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload packets
> + * will have port ID in the SA
> + */
> +
> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
> - offset = offsetof(struct ip6_hdr, ip6_dst);
> - ip6_dst = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i], uint8_t *, offset);
> - memcpy(&dst_ip[i][0], ip6_dst, 16);
> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
> + * required to get the hop
> + */
> + offset = offsetof(struct ip6_hdr, ip6_dst);
> + ip6_dst = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i], uint8_t *,
> + offset);
> + memcpy(&dst_ip[lpm_pkts][0], ip6_dst, 16);
> + lpm_pkts++;
> + }
> }
>
> - rte_lpm6_lookup_bulk_func((struct rte_lpm6 *)rt_ctx, dst_ip,
> - hop, nb_pkts);
> + rte_lpm6_lookup_bulk_func((struct rte_lpm6 *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
> + lpm_pkts);
> +
> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>
> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
> - if (hop[i] == -1) {
> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
> + /* Read hop from the SA */
> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
> + } else {
> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
> + }
> +
> + if (pkt_hop == -1) {
> rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
> continue;
> }
> - send_single_packet(pkts[i], hop[i] & 0xff);
> + send_single_packet(pkts[i], pkt_hop & 0xff);
> }
> }
>
>
Hi Akhil,
Please see inline.
Thanks,
Anoob
On 11/24/2017 02:58 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> Hi Anoob,
>
> On 11/15/2017 3:11 PM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
>> When security offload is enabled, the packet should be forwarded on the
>> port configured in the SA. Security session will be configured on that
>> port only, and sending the packet on other ports could result in
>> unencrypted packets being sent out.
>>
>> This would have performance improvements too, as the per packet LPM
>> lookup would be avoided for IPsec packets, in inline mode.
>>
>> Fixes: ec17993a145a ("examples/ipsec-secgw: support security offload")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anoob Joseph <anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>
>> ---
>> v3
>> * Bug fix (fixed a wrong if condition)
>> * Minor changes in documentation
>>
>> v2:
>> * Updated documentation with the change in behavior for outbound inline
>> offloaded packets.
>>
>> doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst | 10 +++-
>> examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c | 92
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
>> b/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
>> index d6cfdbf..ae18acd 100644
>> --- a/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
>> +++ b/doc/guides/sample_app_ug/ipsec_secgw.rst
>> @@ -61,6 +61,12 @@ In case of complete protocol offload, the
>> processing of headers(ESP and outer
>> IP header) is done by the hardware and the application does not
>> need to
>> add/remove them during outbound/inbound processing.
>> +For inline offloaded outbound traffic, the application will not do
>> the LPM
>> +lookup for routing, as the port on which the packet has to be
>> forwarded will be
>> +part of the SA. Security parameters will be configured on that port
>> only, and
>> +sending the packet on other ports could result in unencrypted
>> packets being
>> +sent out.
>> +
>> The Path for IPsec Inbound traffic is:
>> * Read packets from the port.
>> @@ -543,7 +549,9 @@ where each options means:
>> ``<port_id>``
>> * Port/device ID of the ethernet/crypto accelerator for which
>> the SA is
>> - configured. This option is used when *type* is NOT *no-offload*
>> + configured. For *inline-crypto-offload* and
>> *inline-protocol-offload*, this
>> + port will be used for routing. The routing table will not be
>> referred in
>> + this case.
>> * Optional: No, if *type* is not *no-offload*
>> diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
>> b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
>> index c98454a..cfcb9d5 100644
>> --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
>> +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c
>> @@ -585,31 +585,72 @@ process_pkts_outbound_nosp(struct ipsec_ctx
>> *ipsec_ctx,
>> traffic->ip6.num = nb_pkts_out;
>> }
>> +static inline int32_t
>> +get_hop_for_offload_pkt(struct rte_mbuf *pkt)
>> +{
>> + struct ipsec_mbuf_metadata *priv;
>> + struct ipsec_sa *sa;
>> +
>> + priv = get_priv(pkt);
>> +
>> + sa = priv->sa;
>> + if (unlikely(sa == NULL)) {
>> + RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC, "SA not saved in private data\n");
>> + return -1;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return sa->portid;
>> +}
>> +
>> static inline void
>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t
>> nb_pkts)
>> {
>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>> uint16_t i, offset;
>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>> return;
>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload
>> packets
>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>> + */
>> +
>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>> + * required to get the hop
>> + */
>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>> + lpm_pkts++;
>> + }
>> }
>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>> nb_pkts);
>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>> lpm_pkts);
>> +
>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>> + } else {
>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>> + }
>> +
> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
> believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop &
> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block and free
> the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>
> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good idea
> if we have a flag available for the same.
> Others can comment.
The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error values,
but we are using a single routine to get the hop for offload packets.
The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for ipv4 lookups. For ipv6,
error is -1. If we need a cleaner solution, we can have ipv4 & ipv6
variants of "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But that would be repetition of
some code.
>
>> + if (pkt_hop == -1) {
>> rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
>> continue;
>> }
>> - send_single_packet(pkts[i], hop[i] & 0xff);
>> + send_single_packet(pkts[i], pkt_hop & 0xff);
>> }
>> }
>> @@ -619,26 +660,49 @@ route6_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct
>> rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t nb_pkts)
>> int32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>> uint8_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2][16];
>> uint8_t *ip6_dst;
>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>> uint16_t i, offset;
>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>> return;
>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload
>> packets
>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>> + */
>> +
>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip6_hdr, ip6_dst);
>> - ip6_dst = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i], uint8_t *, offset);
>> - memcpy(&dst_ip[i][0], ip6_dst, 16);
>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>> + * required to get the hop
>> + */
>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip6_hdr, ip6_dst);
>> + ip6_dst = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i], uint8_t *,
>> + offset);
>> + memcpy(&dst_ip[lpm_pkts][0], ip6_dst, 16);
>> + lpm_pkts++;
>> + }
>> }
>> - rte_lpm6_lookup_bulk_func((struct rte_lpm6 *)rt_ctx, dst_ip,
>> - hop, nb_pkts);
>> + rte_lpm6_lookup_bulk_func((struct rte_lpm6 *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>> + lpm_pkts);
>> +
>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>> - if (hop[i] == -1) {
>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>> + } else {
>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (pkt_hop == -1) {
>> rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
>> continue;
>> }
>> - send_single_packet(pkts[i], hop[i] & 0xff);
>> + send_single_packet(pkts[i], pkt_hop & 0xff);
>> }
>> }
>>
>
Hi Anoob,
On 11/24/2017 3:28 PM, Anoob wrote:
>>> static inline void
>>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t
>>> nb_pkts)
>>> {
>>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>>> uint16_t i, offset;
>>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>>> return;
>>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload
>>> packets
>>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>>> + * required to get the hop
>>> + */
>>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>>> + lpm_pkts++;
>>> + }
>>> }
>>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>> nb_pkts);
>>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>> lpm_pkts);
>>> +
>>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>>> + } else {
>>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>>> + }
>>> +
>> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
>> believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop &
>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block and free
>> the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>>
>> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good idea
>> if we have a flag available for the same.
>> Others can comment.
> The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error values,
> but we are using a single routine to get the hop for offload packets.
> The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for ipv4 lookups. For ipv6,
> error is -1. If we need a cleaner solution, we can have ipv4 & ipv6
> variants of "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But that would be repetition of
> some code.
my concern over this patch is that there is an addition of an extra
check in the non inline case and we can get rid of that with some
changes in the code(lib/app). Regarding route6_pkts, the code looks
cleaner than route4_pkts
-Akhil
Hi Akhil,
On 24-11-2017 16:19, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> Hi Anoob,
>
> On 11/24/2017 3:28 PM, Anoob wrote:
>>>> static inline void
>>>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
>>>> uint8_t nb_pkts)
>>>> {
>>>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>>>> uint16_t i, offset;
>>>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>>>> return;
>>>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload
>>>> packets
>>>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>>>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>>>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>>>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>>>> + * required to get the hop
>>>> + */
>>>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>>>> + lpm_pkts++;
>>>> + }
>>>> }
>>>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>> nb_pkts);
>>>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>> lpm_pkts);
>>>> +
>>>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>>>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>>>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>>>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>>>> + } else {
>>>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>>>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>>>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>>>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
>>> believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop &
>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block and
>>> free the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>>>
>>> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good
>>> idea if we have a flag available for the same.
>>> Others can comment.
>> The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error values,
>> but we are using a single routine to get the hop for offload packets.
>> The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for ipv4 lookups. For ipv6,
>> error is -1. If we need a cleaner solution, we can have ipv4 & ipv6
>> variants of "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But that would be repetition
>> of some code.
>
> my concern over this patch is that there is an addition of an extra
> check in the non inline case and we can get rid of that with some
> changes in the code(lib/app). Regarding route6_pkts, the code looks
> cleaner than route4_pkts
If we have ipv4 and ipv6 variants of the "get_hop_for_offload_packet"
function, the code would look much cleaner. Shall I update the patch
with such a change and send v4?
>
>
> -Akhil
Thanks,
Anoob
Hi Anoob,
On 11/29/2017 9:51 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
> Hi Akhil,
>
>
> On 24-11-2017 16:19, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>> Hi Anoob,
>>
>> On 11/24/2017 3:28 PM, Anoob wrote:
>>>>> static inline void
>>>>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
>>>>> uint8_t nb_pkts)
>>>>> {
>>>>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>>>>> uint16_t i, offset;
>>>>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>>>>> return;
>>>>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload
>>>>> packets
>>>>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +
>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>>>>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>>>>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>>>>> + * required to get the hop
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>>>>> + lpm_pkts++;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> }
>>>>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>>> nb_pkts);
>>>>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>>> lpm_pkts);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>>>>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>>>>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>>>>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>>>>> + } else {
>>>>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>>>>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>>>>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>>>>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
>>>> believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
>>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop &
>>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block and
>>>> free the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>>>>
>>>> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good
>>>> idea if we have a flag available for the same.
>>>> Others can comment.
>>> The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error values,
>>> but we are using a single routine to get the hop for offload packets.
>>> The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for ipv4 lookups. For ipv6,
>>> error is -1. If we need a cleaner solution, we can have ipv4 & ipv6
>>> variants of "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But that would be repetition
>>> of some code.
>>
>> my concern over this patch is that there is an addition of an extra
>> check in the non inline case and we can get rid of that with some
>> changes in the code(lib/app). Regarding route6_pkts, the code looks
>> cleaner than route4_pkts
> If we have ipv4 and ipv6 variants of the "get_hop_for_offload_packet"
> function, the code would look much cleaner. Shall I update the patch
> with such a change and send v4?
I believe we shall get rid of "RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS" from the
rte_lpm_lookup_bulk(), we shall have similar error flags for v4 and v6
APIs. Either we can have RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS or -1 as check for errors.
Sergio can comment on this.
Duplicating code for get_hop_for_offload_packet may not be a good idea.
-Akhil
Hi Akhil,
On 12/04/2017 01:19 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
> Hi Anoob,
> On 11/29/2017 9:51 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
>> Hi Akhil,
>>
>>
>> On 24-11-2017 16:19, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>>> Hi Anoob,
>>>
>>> On 11/24/2017 3:28 PM, Anoob wrote:
>>>>>> static inline void
>>>>>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
>>>>>> uint8_t nb_pkts)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>>>>>> uint16_t i, offset;
>>>>>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>>>>>> return;
>>>>>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets.
>>>>>> Offload packets
>>>>>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>>>>>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>>>>>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>>>>>> + * required to get the hop
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>>>>>> + lpm_pkts++;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>>>> nb_pkts);
>>>>>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>>>> lpm_pkts);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>>>>>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>>>>>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>>>>>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>>>>>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>>>>>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>>>>>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
>>>>> believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
>>>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop &
>>>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block and
>>>>> free the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good
>>>>> idea if we have a flag available for the same.
>>>>> Others can comment.
>>>> The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error
>>>> values, but we are using a single routine to get the hop for
>>>> offload packets. The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for ipv4
>>>> lookups. For ipv6, error is -1. If we need a cleaner solution, we
>>>> can have ipv4 & ipv6 variants of "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But
>>>> that would be repetition of some code.
>>>
>>> my concern over this patch is that there is an addition of an extra
>>> check in the non inline case and we can get rid of that with some
>>> changes in the code(lib/app). Regarding route6_pkts, the code looks
>>> cleaner than route4_pkts
>> If we have ipv4 and ipv6 variants of the "get_hop_for_offload_packet"
>> function, the code would look much cleaner. Shall I update the patch
>> with such a change and send v4?
>
> I believe we shall get rid of "RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS" from the
> rte_lpm_lookup_bulk(), we shall have similar error flags for v4 and v6
> APIs. Either we can have RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS or -1 as check for
> errors.
This will call for an ABI change. And LPM library has multiple variants
for v4 & v6 lookups. We will need to modify all such instances. I've
CCed Bruce for his opinion on this matter. If maintainers can decide on
how to address this properly, I can plan my next steps accordingly.
> Sergio can comment on this.
>
> Duplicating code for get_hop_for_offload_packet may not be a good idea.
>
> -Akhil
>
Hi,
On 12/6/2017 11:08 AM, Anoob wrote:
> Hi Akhil,
>
> On 12/04/2017 01:19 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>> Hi Anoob,
>> On 11/29/2017 9:51 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
>>> Hi Akhil,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24-11-2017 16:19, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>>>> Hi Anoob,
>>>>
>>>> On 11/24/2017 3:28 PM, Anoob wrote:
>>>>>>> static inline void
>>>>>>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
>>>>>>> uint8_t nb_pkts)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>>>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>>>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>>>>>>> uint16_t i, offset;
>>>>>>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>>>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>>>>>>> return;
>>>>>>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets.
>>>>>>> Offload packets
>>>>>>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>>>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>>>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>>>>>>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>>>>>>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>>>>>>> + * required to get the hop
>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>>>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>>>>>>> + lpm_pkts++;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip,
>>>>>>> hop, nb_pkts);
>>>>>>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>>>>> lpm_pkts);
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>>>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>>>>>>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>>>>>>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>>>>>>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>>>>>>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>>>>>>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>>>>>>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case. I
>>>>>> believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
>>>>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop
>>>>>> & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block
>>>>>> and free the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good
>>>>>> idea if we have a flag available for the same.
>>>>>> Others can comment.
>>>>> The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error
>>>>> values, but we are using a single routine to get the hop for
>>>>> offload packets. The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for ipv4
>>>>> lookups. For ipv6, error is -1. If we need a cleaner solution, we
>>>>> can have ipv4 & ipv6 variants of "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But
>>>>> that would be repetition of some code.
>>>>
>>>> my concern over this patch is that there is an addition of an extra
>>>> check in the non inline case and we can get rid of that with some
>>>> changes in the code(lib/app). Regarding route6_pkts, the code looks
>>>> cleaner than route4_pkts
>>> If we have ipv4 and ipv6 variants of the
>>> "get_hop_for_offload_packet" function, the code would look much
>>> cleaner. Shall I update the patch with such a change and send v4?
>>
>> I believe we shall get rid of "RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS" from the
>> rte_lpm_lookup_bulk(), we shall have similar error flags for v4 and
>> v6 APIs. Either we can have RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS or -1 as check for
>> errors.
> This will call for an ABI change. And LPM library has multiple
> variants for v4 & v6 lookups. We will need to modify all such
> instances. I've CCed Bruce for his opinion on this matter. If
> maintainers can decide on how to address this properly, I can plan my
> next steps accordingly.
Maybe this alternative approach will help: change the
get_hop_for_offload_packet to return -1 for v6 and clear
RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS flag for v4 errors. This will be on the error
path so the extra code to check the pkt type will have no performance
impact, and the route function can be cleaner and we can lose the extra
if in the v4 one.
>> Sergio can comment on this.
>>
>> Duplicating code for get_hop_for_offload_packet may not be a good idea.
>>
>> -Akhil
>>
>
Hi,
On 12/11/2017 03:56 PM, Radu Nicolau wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 12/6/2017 11:08 AM, Anoob wrote:
>> Hi Akhil,
>>
>> On 12/04/2017 01:19 PM, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>>> Hi Anoob,
>>> On 11/29/2017 9:51 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
>>>> Hi Akhil,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 24-11-2017 16:19, Akhil Goyal wrote:
>>>>> Hi Anoob,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/24/2017 3:28 PM, Anoob wrote:
>>>>>>>> static inline void
>>>>>>>> route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
>>>>>>>> uint8_t nb_pkts)
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>> uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>>>>> uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
>>>>>>>> + int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
>>>>>>>> uint16_t i, offset;
>>>>>>>> + uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>>>>> if (nb_pkts == 0)
>>>>>>>> return;
>>>>>>>> + /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets.
>>>>>>>> Offload packets
>>>>>>>> + * will have port ID in the SA
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>>>>> - offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>>>>> - uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>>>>> - dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
>>>>>>>> + if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
>>>>>>>> + /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
>>>>>>>> + * required to get the hop
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> + offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
>>>>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
>>>>>>>> + uint32_t *, offset);
>>>>>>>> + dst_ip[lpm_pkts] =
>>>>>>>> rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
>>>>>>>> + lpm_pkts++;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> - rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip,
>>>>>>>> hop, nb_pkts);
>>>>>>>> + rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
>>>>>>>> lpm_pkts);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpm_pkts = 0;
>>>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
>>>>>>>> - if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
>>>>>>>> + if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
>>>>>>>> + /* Read hop from the SA */
>>>>>>>> + pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
>>>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>>>> + /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
>>>>>>>> + pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
>>>>>>>> + if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
>>>>>>>> + pkt_hop = -1;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> I believe the following check is redundant for non inline case.
>>>>>>> I believe get_hop_for_offload_pkt can also set the
>>>>>>> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS if route is success and take the (pkt_hop
>>>>>>> & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0 check outside the if else block
>>>>>>> and free the packet if it is unsuccessful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Same comment for route6_pkts. Checking with -1 may not be a good
>>>>>>> idea if we have a flag available for the same.
>>>>>>> Others can comment.
>>>>>> The problem is ipv4 & ipv6 LPM lookups return different error
>>>>>> values, but we are using a single routine to get the hop for
>>>>>> offload packets. The flag(RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) is only for
>>>>>> ipv4 lookups. For ipv6, error is -1. If we need a cleaner
>>>>>> solution, we can have ipv4 & ipv6 variants of
>>>>>> "get_hop_for_offload_pkt". But that would be repetition of some
>>>>>> code.
>>>>>
>>>>> my concern over this patch is that there is an addition of an
>>>>> extra check in the non inline case and we can get rid of that with
>>>>> some changes in the code(lib/app). Regarding route6_pkts, the code
>>>>> looks cleaner than route4_pkts
>>>> If we have ipv4 and ipv6 variants of the
>>>> "get_hop_for_offload_packet" function, the code would look much
>>>> cleaner. Shall I update the patch with such a change and send v4?
>>>
>>> I believe we shall get rid of "RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS" from the
>>> rte_lpm_lookup_bulk(), we shall have similar error flags for v4 and
>>> v6 APIs. Either we can have RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS or -1 as check
>>> for errors.
>> This will call for an ABI change. And LPM library has multiple
>> variants for v4 & v6 lookups. We will need to modify all such
>> instances. I've CCed Bruce for his opinion on this matter. If
>> maintainers can decide on how to address this properly, I can plan my
>> next steps accordingly.
> Maybe this alternative approach will help: change the
> get_hop_for_offload_packet to return -1 for v6 and clear
> RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS flag for v4 errors. This will be on the error
> path so the extra code to check the pkt type will have no performance
> impact, and the route function can be cleaner and we can lose the
> extra if in the v4 one.
That should be fine I guess. So the get_hop_for_offload_packet will have
one more argument to specify whether it is ipv4 or ipv6, right?
I'll revise the patch with this suggestion.
>>> Sergio can comment on this.
>>>
>>> Duplicating code for get_hop_for_offload_packet may not be a good idea.
>>>
>>> -Akhil
>>>
>>
>
@@ -61,6 +61,12 @@ In case of complete protocol offload, the processing of headers(ESP and outer
IP header) is done by the hardware and the application does not need to
add/remove them during outbound/inbound processing.
+For inline offloaded outbound traffic, the application will not do the LPM
+lookup for routing, as the port on which the packet has to be forwarded will be
+part of the SA. Security parameters will be configured on that port only, and
+sending the packet on other ports could result in unencrypted packets being
+sent out.
+
The Path for IPsec Inbound traffic is:
* Read packets from the port.
@@ -543,7 +549,9 @@ where each options means:
``<port_id>``
* Port/device ID of the ethernet/crypto accelerator for which the SA is
- configured. This option is used when *type* is NOT *no-offload*
+ configured. For *inline-crypto-offload* and *inline-protocol-offload*, this
+ port will be used for routing. The routing table will not be referred in
+ this case.
* Optional: No, if *type* is not *no-offload*
@@ -585,31 +585,72 @@ process_pkts_outbound_nosp(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx,
traffic->ip6.num = nb_pkts_out;
}
+static inline int32_t
+get_hop_for_offload_pkt(struct rte_mbuf *pkt)
+{
+ struct ipsec_mbuf_metadata *priv;
+ struct ipsec_sa *sa;
+
+ priv = get_priv(pkt);
+
+ sa = priv->sa;
+ if (unlikely(sa == NULL)) {
+ RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC, "SA not saved in private data\n");
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ return sa->portid;
+}
+
static inline void
route4_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t nb_pkts)
{
uint32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
uint32_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
+ int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
uint16_t i, offset;
+ uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
if (nb_pkts == 0)
return;
+ /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload packets
+ * will have port ID in the SA
+ */
+
for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
- offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
- dst_ip[i] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
- uint32_t *, offset);
- dst_ip[i] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[i]);
+ if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
+ /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
+ * required to get the hop
+ */
+ offset = offsetof(struct ip, ip_dst);
+ dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i],
+ uint32_t *, offset);
+ dst_ip[lpm_pkts] = rte_be_to_cpu_32(dst_ip[lpm_pkts]);
+ lpm_pkts++;
+ }
}
- rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop, nb_pkts);
+ rte_lpm_lookup_bulk((struct rte_lpm *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop, lpm_pkts);
+
+ lpm_pkts = 0;
for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
- if ((hop[i] & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0) {
+ if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
+ /* Read hop from the SA */
+ pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
+ } else {
+ /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
+ pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
+ if ((pkt_hop & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) == 0)
+ pkt_hop = -1;
+ }
+
+ if (pkt_hop == -1) {
rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
continue;
}
- send_single_packet(pkts[i], hop[i] & 0xff);
+ send_single_packet(pkts[i], pkt_hop & 0xff);
}
}
@@ -619,26 +660,49 @@ route6_pkts(struct rt_ctx *rt_ctx, struct rte_mbuf *pkts[], uint8_t nb_pkts)
int32_t hop[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2];
uint8_t dst_ip[MAX_PKT_BURST * 2][16];
uint8_t *ip6_dst;
+ int32_t pkt_hop = 0;
uint16_t i, offset;
+ uint16_t lpm_pkts = 0;
if (nb_pkts == 0)
return;
+ /* Need to do an LPM lookup for non-offload packets. Offload packets
+ * will have port ID in the SA
+ */
+
for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
- offset = offsetof(struct ip6_hdr, ip6_dst);
- ip6_dst = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i], uint8_t *, offset);
- memcpy(&dst_ip[i][0], ip6_dst, 16);
+ if (!(pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD)) {
+ /* Security offload not enabled. So an LPM lookup is
+ * required to get the hop
+ */
+ offset = offsetof(struct ip6_hdr, ip6_dst);
+ ip6_dst = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(pkts[i], uint8_t *,
+ offset);
+ memcpy(&dst_ip[lpm_pkts][0], ip6_dst, 16);
+ lpm_pkts++;
+ }
}
- rte_lpm6_lookup_bulk_func((struct rte_lpm6 *)rt_ctx, dst_ip,
- hop, nb_pkts);
+ rte_lpm6_lookup_bulk_func((struct rte_lpm6 *)rt_ctx, dst_ip, hop,
+ lpm_pkts);
+
+ lpm_pkts = 0;
for (i = 0; i < nb_pkts; i++) {
- if (hop[i] == -1) {
+ if (pkts[i]->ol_flags & PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD) {
+ /* Read hop from the SA */
+ pkt_hop = get_hop_for_offload_pkt(pkts[i]);
+ } else {
+ /* Need to use hop returned by lookup */
+ pkt_hop = hop[lpm_pkts++];
+ }
+
+ if (pkt_hop == -1) {
rte_pktmbuf_free(pkts[i]);
continue;
}
- send_single_packet(pkts[i], hop[i] & 0xff);
+ send_single_packet(pkts[i], pkt_hop & 0xff);
}
}