RE: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: flow_offload: add tc police action parameters

On, February 17, 2022 8:10 PM, Roi wrote:

On 2022-02-17 12:25 PM, Baowen Zheng wrote:

quoted

On February 17, 2022 4:28 PM, Jianbo wrote:

quoted

The current police offload action entry is missing exceed/notexceed
actions and parameters that can be configured by tc police action.
Add the missing parameters as a pre-step for offloading police
actions to hardware.

Signed-off-by: Jianbo Liu <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Roi Dayan <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
---
include/net/flow_offload.h     | 13 ++++++++++
include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++
net/sched/act_police.c         | 46

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

quoted

quoted

3 files changed, 89 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/net/flow_offload.h b/include/net/flow_offload.h

index
5b8c54eb7a6b..94cde6bbc8a5 100644

--- a/include/net/flow_offload.h
+++ b/include/net/flow_offload.h

@@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ enum flow_action_id {

	FLOW_ACTION_MPLS_MANGLE,
	FLOW_ACTION_GATE,
	FLOW_ACTION_PPPOE_PUSH,
+	FLOW_ACTION_JUMP,
+	FLOW_ACTION_PIPE,
	NUM_FLOW_ACTIONS,
};

@@ -235,9 +237,20 @@ struct flow_action_entry {

		struct {				/* FLOW_ACTION_POLICE */
			u32			burst;
			u64			rate_bytes_ps;
+			u64			peakrate_bytes_ps;
+			u32			avrate;
+			u16			overhead;
			u64			burst_pkt;
			u64			rate_pkt_ps;
			u32			mtu;
+			struct {
+				enum flow_action_id     act_id;
+				u32                     index;
+			} exceed;
+			struct {
+				enum flow_action_id     act_id;
+				u32                     index;
+			} notexceed;

It seems exceed and notexceed use the same format struct, will it be more

simpler to define as:

quoted

			struct {
				enum flow_action_id     act_id;
				u32                     index;
			} exceed, notexceed;

right. it can be.

quoted

quoted

		} police;
		struct {				/* FLOW_ACTION_CT */
			int action;

diff --git a/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h

b/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h index 72649512dcdd..283bde711a42
100644

--- a/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h
+++ b/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h

@@ -159,4 +159,34 @@ static inline u32 tcf_police_tcfp_mtu(const

struct tc_action *act)
	return params->tcfp_mtu;
}

+static inline u64 tcf_police_peakrate_bytes_ps(const struct
+tc_action
+*act) {
+	struct tcf_police *police = to_police(act);
+	struct tcf_police_params *params;
+
+	params = rcu_dereference_protected(police->params,
+					   lockdep_is_held(&police->tcf_lock));
+	return params->peak.rate_bytes_ps;
+}
+
+static inline u32 tcf_police_tcfp_ewma_rate(const struct tc_action
+*act) {
+	struct tcf_police *police = to_police(act);
+	struct tcf_police_params *params;
+
+	params = rcu_dereference_protected(police->params,
+					   lockdep_is_held(&police->tcf_lock));
+	return params->tcfp_ewma_rate;
+}
+
+static inline u16 tcf_police_rate_overhead(const struct tc_action
+*act) {
+	struct tcf_police *police = to_police(act);
+	struct tcf_police_params *params;
+
+	params = rcu_dereference_protected(police->params,
+					   lockdep_is_held(&police->tcf_lock));
+	return params->rate.overhead;
+}
+
#endif /* __NET_TC_POLICE_H */

diff --git a/net/sched/act_police.c b/net/sched/act_police.c index

0923aa2b8f8a..0457b6c9c4e7 100644

--- a/net/sched/act_police.c
+++ b/net/sched/act_police.c

@@ -405,20 +405,66 @@ static int tcf_police_search(struct net *net,

struct tc_action **a, u32 index)
	return tcf_idr_search(tn, a, index); }

+static int tcf_police_act_to_flow_act(int tc_act, int *index) {
+	int act_id = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
+	if (!TC_ACT_EXT_OPCODE(tc_act)) {
+		if (tc_act == TC_ACT_OK)
+			act_id = FLOW_ACTION_ACCEPT;
+		else if (tc_act ==  TC_ACT_SHOT)
+			act_id = FLOW_ACTION_DROP;
+		else if (tc_act == TC_ACT_PIPE)
+			act_id = FLOW_ACTION_PIPE;
+	} else if (TC_ACT_EXT_CMP(tc_act, TC_ACT_GOTO_CHAIN)) {
+		act_id = FLOW_ACTION_GOTO;
+		*index = tc_act & TC_ACT_EXT_VAL_MASK;

For the TC_ACT_GOTO_CHAIN  action, the goto_chain information is missing

from software to hardware, is it useful for hardware to check?

quoted

what information do you mean?

Sorry, I do not realize the chain index is in the return value of index, so please just ignore.
It seems the definition of index is a little confused since in TC_ACT_GOTO_CHAIN case, it means chain index and in TC_ACT_JUMP case, it means jump count. 
Just a suggestion, can we change the index definition as a union as:
	union {
			u32 chain_index;
			u32 jmp_cnt;
		{
WDYT?

quoted

quoted

+	} else if (TC_ACT_EXT_CMP(tc_act, TC_ACT_JUMP)) {
+		act_id = FLOW_ACTION_JUMP;
+		*index = tc_act & TC_ACT_EXT_VAL_MASK;
+	}
+
+	return act_id;
+}
+
static int tcf_police_offload_act_setup(struct tc_action *act, void

*entry_data,

quoted

quoted

					u32 *index_inc, bool bind)
{
	if (bind) {
		struct flow_action_entry *entry = entry_data;
+		struct tcf_police *police = to_police(act);
+		struct tcf_police_params *p;
+		int act_id;
+
+		p = rcu_dereference_protected(police->params,
+					      lockdep_is_held(&police-

tcf_lock));

quoted

		entry->id = FLOW_ACTION_POLICE;
		entry->police.burst = tcf_police_burst(act);
		entry->police.rate_bytes_ps =
			tcf_police_rate_bytes_ps(act);
+		entry->police.peakrate_bytes_ps =
tcf_police_peakrate_bytes_ps(act);
+		entry->police.avrate = tcf_police_tcfp_ewma_rate(act);
+		entry->police.overhead = tcf_police_rate_overhead(act);
		entry->police.burst_pkt = tcf_police_burst_pkt(act);
		entry->police.rate_pkt_ps =
			tcf_police_rate_pkt_ps(act);
		entry->police.mtu = tcf_police_tcfp_mtu(act);
+
+		act_id = tcf_police_act_to_flow_act(police->tcf_action,
+						    &entry-

quoted

police.exceed.index);

+		if (act_id < 0)
+			return act_id;
+
+		entry->police.exceed.act_id = act_id;
+
+		act_id = tcf_police_act_to_flow_act(p->tcfp_result,
+						    &entry-

quoted

police.notexceed.index);

+		if (act_id < 0)
+			return act_id;
+
+		entry->police.notexceed.act_id = act_id;
+
		*index_inc = 1;
	} else {
		struct flow_offload_action *fl_action = entry_data;
--
2.26.2