On 09/29/2017 12:45 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> On 29/09/17 12:29, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>> On 28/09/17 20:34, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> From: Yotam Gigi <yot...@mellanox.com>
>>>
>>> In order to allow the ipmr module to do partial multicast forwarding
>>> according to the device parent ID, add the device parent ID field to the
>>> VIF struct. This way, the forwarding path can use the parent ID field
>>> without invoking switchdev calls, which requires the RTNL lock.
>>>
>>> When a new VIF is added, set the device parent ID field in it by invoking
>>> the switchdev_port_attr_get call.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yotam Gigi <yot...@mellanox.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <ido...@mellanox.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/mroute.h | 2 ++
>>> net/ipv4/ipmr.c | 9 +++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mroute.h b/include/linux/mroute.h
>>> index b072a84..a46577f 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/mroute.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/mroute.h
>>> @@ -57,6 +57,8 @@ static inline bool ipmr_rule_default(const struct
>>> fib_rule *rule)
>>>
>>> struct vif_device {
>>> struct net_device *dev; /* Device we are using
>>> */
>>> + struct netdev_phys_item_id dev_parent_id; /* Device parent ID
>>> */
>>> + bool dev_parent_id_valid;
>>> unsigned long bytes_in,bytes_out;
>>> unsigned long pkt_in,pkt_out; /* Statistics
>>> */
>>> unsigned long rate_limit; /* Traffic shaping (NI)
>>> */
>>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/ipmr.c b/net/ipv4/ipmr.c
>>> index 292a8e8..4566c54 100644
>>> --- a/net/ipv4/ipmr.c
>>> +++ b/net/ipv4/ipmr.c
>>> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@
>>> #include <net/fib_rules.h>
>>> #include <linux/netconf.h>
>>> #include <net/nexthop.h>
>>> +#include <net/switchdev.h>
>>>
>>> struct ipmr_rule {
>>> struct fib_rule common;
>>> @@ -868,6 +869,9 @@ static int vif_add(struct net *net, struct mr_table
>>> *mrt,
>>> struct vifctl *vifc, int mrtsock)
>>> {
>>> int vifi = vifc->vifc_vifi;
>>> + struct switchdev_attr attr = {
>>> + .id = SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PARENT_ID,
>>> + };
>>> struct vif_device *v = &mrt->vif_table[vifi];
>>> struct net_device *dev;
>>> struct in_device *in_dev;
>>> @@ -942,6 +946,11 @@ static int vif_add(struct net *net, struct mr_table
>>> *mrt,
>>>
>>> /* Fill in the VIF structures */
>>>
>>> + attr.orig_dev = dev;
>>> + if (!switchdev_port_attr_get(dev, &attr)) {
>>> + v->dev_parent_id_valid = true;
>>> + memcpy(v->dev_parent_id.id, attr.u.ppid.id, attr.u.ppid.id_len);
>> Hmm, shouldn't you set dev_parent_id.id_len too ? It would seem
>> netdev_phys_item_id_same()
>> uses it in the comparison and without the len it would always look like
>> they're the same
>> because memcmp will simply return 0 with count = 0.
> Also maybe we can use the non-zero id_len as a signal that it was set and
> drop the dev_parent_id_valid
> field altogether, it would seem there's no valid reason to have id_len == 0
> and yet expect a valid
> parent_id.
Yes, I agree to both. I will remove the parent_id_valid field and use the len to
indicate whether it is valid.
Thanks for spotting the bug - since we have only been testing it with a pimreg
device, the problem was not found in our tests. Multi-ASIC setups are a bit
hard to find these days :)
>>> + }
>>> v->rate_limit = vifc->vifc_rate_limit;
>>> v->local = vifc->vifc_lcl_addr.s_addr;
>>> v->remote = vifc->vifc_rmt_addr.s_addr;
>>>
