On 29/01/2019 20:08, Marcelo Leitner wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:02:03AM +0200, Paul Blakey wrote:
>> TODO: handle EEXist.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com>
>> ---
>> include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h | 2 ++
>> net/sched/cls_flower.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h b/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
>> index 121f1ef..d848d6d 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h
>> @@ -506,6 +506,8 @@ enum {
>> TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_LABELS,
>> TCA_FLOWER_KEY_CT_LABELS_MASK,
>>
>> + TCA_FLOWER_EMATCHES,
>> +
>> __TCA_FLOWER_MAX,
>> };
>>
>> diff --git a/net/sched/cls_flower.c b/net/sched/cls_flower.c
>> index bf74a31..f11fda0 100644
>> --- a/net/sched/cls_flower.c
>> +++ b/net/sched/cls_flower.c
>> @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct cls_fl_filter {
>> struct rhash_head ht_node;
>> struct fl_flow_key mkey;
>> struct tcf_exts exts;
>> + struct tcf_ematch_tree ematches;
>> struct tcf_result res;
>> struct fl_flow_key key;
>> struct list_head list;
>> @@ -332,10 +333,14 @@ static int fl_classify(struct sk_buff *skb, const
>> struct tcf_proto *tp,
>> fl_set_masked_key(&skb_mkey, &skb_key, mask);
>>
>> f = fl_lookup(mask, &skb_mkey, &skb_key);
>> - if (f && !tc_skip_sw(f->flags)) {
>> - *res = f->res;
>> - return tcf_exts_exec(skb, &f->exts, res);
>> - }
>> + if (!f || tc_skip_sw(f->flags))
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + if (!tcf_em_tree_match(skb, &f->ematches, NULL))
>> + continue;
>
> Considering just the recirc_id (and not the other fields supported by
> ematch), have you considered integrating recirc_id match on flow
> dissector instead? It would avoid the matching in 2 steps here and
> benefit from the hashing.
>
yes,
although ematch is no op if not used, I actually have to convert flower
to a rhl hashtable as we can have the flower keys but different ematches
which is a pointer (and why I have the TODO in the commit msg), then all
similar flows , different only by recirc id ematch, could be on the same
list, and this would be slow. I'm not sure how real this example is, but
I agree.
So I'll change it for next patch, unless someone thinks different.
Thanks.
>> +
>> + *res = f->res;
>> + return tcf_exts_exec(skb, &f->exts, res);
>> }
>> return -1;
>> }
>> @@ -388,6 +393,7 @@ static bool fl_mask_put(struct cls_fl_head *head, struct
>> fl_flow_mask *mask,
>> static void __fl_destroy_filter(struct cls_fl_filter *f)
>> {
>> tcf_exts_destroy(&f->exts);
>> + tcf_em_tree_destroy(&f->ematches);
>> tcf_exts_put_net(&f->exts);
>> kfree(f);
>> }
>> @@ -523,6 +529,7 @@ static void *fl_get(struct tcf_proto *tp, u32 handle)
>> static const struct nla_policy fl_policy[TCA_FLOWER_MAX + 1] = {
>> [TCA_FLOWER_UNSPEC] = { .type = NLA_UNSPEC },
>> [TCA_FLOWER_CLASSID] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
>> + [TCA_FLOWER_EMATCHES] = { .type = NLA_NESTED },
>> [TCA_FLOWER_INDEV] = { .type = NLA_STRING,
>> .len = IFNAMSIZ },
>> [TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ETH_DST] = { .len = ETH_ALEN },
>> @@ -1348,6 +1355,10 @@ static int fl_set_parms(struct net *net, struct
>> tcf_proto *tp,
>> if (err < 0)
>> return err;
>>
>> + err = tcf_em_tree_validate(tp, tb[TCA_FLOWER_EMATCHES], &f->ematches);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + return err;
>> +
>> if (tb[TCA_FLOWER_CLASSID]) {
>> f->res.classid = nla_get_u32(tb[TCA_FLOWER_CLASSID]);
>> tcf_bind_filter(tp, &f->res, base);
>> @@ -2143,6 +2154,9 @@ static int fl_dump(struct net *net, struct tcf_proto
>> *tp, void *fh,
>> nla_put_u32(skb, TCA_FLOWER_CLASSID, f->res.classid))
>> goto nla_put_failure;
>>
>> + if (tcf_em_tree_dump(skb, &f->ematches, TCA_FLOWER_EMATCHES) < 0)
>> + goto nla_put_failure;
>> +
>> key = &f->key;
>> mask = &f->mask->key;
>>
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
>>
