On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 22:07:22 +0300
Tudor Cornea [off-list ref] wrote:

Indeed, the vlan insertion could be a costly operation. We should probably
do it only if the user specifically asks to have the vlan tag in the packet.
Otherwise, af_packet PMD users might pay a price in terms of performance
for something they didn't ask for.

I was thinking of avoiding having to change the application in order to
re-insert the vlan tag.
Doing this operation inside the PMD driver seemed like a good fit.

Looking at the netvsc driver (drivers/net/netvsc), the vlan insertion is
guarded by a check to hv->vlan_strip

  if (!hv->vlan_strip && rte_vlan_insert(&m)) {

hv->vlan_strip seems to be initialized in hn_dev_configure() in the
following way

 hv->vlan_strip = !!(rxmode->offloads & DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP);

while 'hv' seems to be stored in rte_eth_dev->data->dev_private

I am thinking of doing something similar for the af_packet PMD.
The 'pmd_internals' structure could potentially hold a field, say
vlan_strip', which could be initialized if the application enables the
DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP in rxmode->offloads

This way, I'm thinking that the application could potentially control the
effect of vlan stripping for the af_packet PMD, in an uniform way, similar
to other PMDs.
Would this be considered an acceptable solution ?




On Tue, 31 Aug 2021 at 18:31, Ferruh Yigit [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 8/20/2021 1:46 PM, Tudor Cornea wrote:  

quoted

The af_packet pmd driver binds to a raw socket and allows
sending and receiving of packets through the kernel.

Since commit bcc6d47903 [1], the kernel strips the vlan tags early in
__netif_receive_skb_core(), so we receive untagged packets while
running with the af_packet pmd.

Luckily for us, the skb vlan-related fields are still populated from the
stripped vlan tags, so we end up having all the information
that we need in the mbuf.

We would like to have the the vlan tag inside the mbuf.
Let's take a shot at it by trying to reinsert the stripped vlan tag.
 

PMD already sets 'mbuf->vlan_tci' and 'PKT_RX_VLAN | PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED'
flags, so application can be aware of the vlan tag and can consume it.

Inserting the vlan tag back to packet is costly, what is the motivation to
do so?
 

quoted

As a side note, something similar was done for the netvsc pmd.

[1]  

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/bcc6d47903612c3861201cc3a866fb604f26b8b2  

quoted

Signed-off-by: Tudor Cornea <redacted>

The netvsc PMD has to handle some subtle cases where VLAN stripping
is done by the VF but the slow path over vmbus does not.
Since most traffic goes over the VF path, it makes sense for the
netvsc PMD to advertise and handle VLAN stripping even if it has
to do it in software.

Ferruh is right the mbuf generated by current AF_PACKET PMD is
valid with VLAN stripped correctly. I think you are also correct
that the stripping needs to be controllable by the application.
And yes the kernel always strips the VLAN; there is no option
to tell socket(AF_PACKET) not to do that.