[dpdk-dev,v2,10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
Checks
Commit Message
This patch adds a function to destroy the flow fliter.
Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
---
drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Comments
Hi Wei,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhao1, Wei
> Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 2:37 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhao1, Wei
> Subject: [PATCH v2 10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
>
> This patch adds a function to destroy the flow fliter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c | 100
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> index fac76bf..bced291 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> @@ -1464,10 +1464,108 @@ igb_flow_validate(__rte_unused struct
> rte_eth_dev *dev,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +/* Destroy a flow rule on igb. */
> +static int
> +igb_flow_destroy(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> + struct rte_flow *flow,
> + struct rte_flow_error *error)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct rte_flow *pmd_flow = flow;
> + enum rte_filter_type filter_type = pmd_flow->filter_type;
> + struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter ntuple_filter;
> + struct rte_eth_ethertype_filter ethertype_filter;
> + struct rte_eth_syn_filter syn_filter;
> + struct rte_eth_flex_filter flex_filter;
> + struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *ntuple_filter_ptr;
> + struct igb_ethertype_filter_ele *ethertype_filter_ptr;
> + struct igb_eth_syn_filter_ele *syn_filter_ptr;
> + struct igb_flex_filter_ele *flex_filter_ptr;
> + struct igb_flow_mem *igb_flow_mem_ptr;
> +
> + switch (filter_type) {
> + case RTE_ETH_FILTER_NTUPLE:
> + ntuple_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *)
> + pmd_flow->rule;
> + (void)rte_memcpy(&ntuple_filter,
> + &ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info,
> + sizeof(struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter));
> + ret = igb_add_del_ntuple_filter(dev, &ntuple_filter, FALSE);
Is a copy necessary? Could "ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info" be used directly for deleting?
The same below.
> + if (!ret) {
> + TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_ntuple_list,
> + ntuple_filter_ptr, entries);
> + rte_free(ntuple_filter_ptr);
> + }
> + break;
Hi, wenzhuo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lu, Wenzhuo
> Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 1:42 PM
> To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
>
> Hi Wei,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Zhao1, Wei
> > Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 2:37 PM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhao1, Wei
> > Subject: [PATCH v2 10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
> >
> > This patch adds a function to destroy the flow fliter.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c | 100
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> > b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c index fac76bf..bced291 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> > @@ -1464,10 +1464,108 @@ igb_flow_validate(__rte_unused struct
> > rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +/* Destroy a flow rule on igb. */
> > +static int
> > +igb_flow_destroy(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > + struct rte_flow *flow,
> > + struct rte_flow_error *error)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + struct rte_flow *pmd_flow = flow;
> > + enum rte_filter_type filter_type = pmd_flow->filter_type;
> > + struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter ntuple_filter;
> > + struct rte_eth_ethertype_filter ethertype_filter;
> > + struct rte_eth_syn_filter syn_filter;
> > + struct rte_eth_flex_filter flex_filter;
> > + struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *ntuple_filter_ptr;
> > + struct igb_ethertype_filter_ele *ethertype_filter_ptr;
> > + struct igb_eth_syn_filter_ele *syn_filter_ptr;
> > + struct igb_flex_filter_ele *flex_filter_ptr;
> > + struct igb_flow_mem *igb_flow_mem_ptr;
> > +
> > + switch (filter_type) {
> > + case RTE_ETH_FILTER_NTUPLE:
> > + ntuple_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *)
> > + pmd_flow->rule;
> > + (void)rte_memcpy(&ntuple_filter,
> > + &ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info,
> > + sizeof(struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter));
> > + ret = igb_add_del_ntuple_filter(dev, &ntuple_filter, FALSE);
> Is a copy necessary? Could "ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info" be used directly
> for deleting?
> The same below.
Maybe this is ok?
ntuple_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *)
pmd_flow->rule;
ret = igb_add_del_ntuple_filter(dev, &ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info, FALSE);
>
> > + if (!ret) {
> > + TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_ntuple_list,
> > + ntuple_filter_ptr, entries);
> > + rte_free(ntuple_filter_ptr);
> > + }
> > + break;
Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhao1, Wei
> Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 2:01 PM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
>
> Hi, wenzhuo
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lu, Wenzhuo
> > Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 1:42 PM
> > To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
> >
> > Hi Wei,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Zhao1, Wei
> > > Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 2:37 PM
> > > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > > Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhao1, Wei
> > > Subject: [PATCH v2 10/11] net/e1000: destroy consistent filter
> > >
> > > This patch adds a function to destroy the flow fliter.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c | 100
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> > > b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c index fac76bf..bced291 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_flow.c
> > > @@ -1464,10 +1464,108 @@ igb_flow_validate(__rte_unused struct
> > > rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +/* Destroy a flow rule on igb. */
> > > +static int
> > > +igb_flow_destroy(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > + struct rte_flow *flow,
> > > + struct rte_flow_error *error)
> > > +{
> > > + int ret;
> > > + struct rte_flow *pmd_flow = flow;
> > > + enum rte_filter_type filter_type = pmd_flow->filter_type;
> > > + struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter ntuple_filter;
> > > + struct rte_eth_ethertype_filter ethertype_filter;
> > > + struct rte_eth_syn_filter syn_filter;
> > > + struct rte_eth_flex_filter flex_filter;
> > > + struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *ntuple_filter_ptr;
> > > + struct igb_ethertype_filter_ele *ethertype_filter_ptr;
> > > + struct igb_eth_syn_filter_ele *syn_filter_ptr;
> > > + struct igb_flex_filter_ele *flex_filter_ptr;
> > > + struct igb_flow_mem *igb_flow_mem_ptr;
> > > +
> > > + switch (filter_type) {
> > > + case RTE_ETH_FILTER_NTUPLE:
> > > + ntuple_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *)
> > > + pmd_flow->rule;
> > > + (void)rte_memcpy(&ntuple_filter,
> > > + &ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info,
> > > + sizeof(struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter));
> > > + ret = igb_add_del_ntuple_filter(dev, &ntuple_filter, FALSE);
> > Is a copy necessary? Could "ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info" be used
> > directly for deleting?
> > The same below.
>
> Maybe this is ok?
>
> ntuple_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *)
> pmd_flow->rule;
> ret = igb_add_del_ntuple_filter(dev, &ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info,
> FALSE);
Yes, I prefer this one. I've had a quick look at igb_add_del_ntuple_filter, at least for deleting, ntuple_filter is only an input argument.
>
>
> >
> > > + if (!ret) {
> > > + TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_ntuple_list,
> > > + ntuple_filter_ptr, entries);
> > > + rte_free(ntuple_filter_ptr);
> > > + }
> > > + break;
@@ -1464,10 +1464,108 @@ igb_flow_validate(__rte_unused struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
return ret;
}
+/* Destroy a flow rule on igb. */
+static int
+igb_flow_destroy(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
+ struct rte_flow *flow,
+ struct rte_flow_error *error)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct rte_flow *pmd_flow = flow;
+ enum rte_filter_type filter_type = pmd_flow->filter_type;
+ struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter ntuple_filter;
+ struct rte_eth_ethertype_filter ethertype_filter;
+ struct rte_eth_syn_filter syn_filter;
+ struct rte_eth_flex_filter flex_filter;
+ struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *ntuple_filter_ptr;
+ struct igb_ethertype_filter_ele *ethertype_filter_ptr;
+ struct igb_eth_syn_filter_ele *syn_filter_ptr;
+ struct igb_flex_filter_ele *flex_filter_ptr;
+ struct igb_flow_mem *igb_flow_mem_ptr;
+
+ switch (filter_type) {
+ case RTE_ETH_FILTER_NTUPLE:
+ ntuple_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ntuple_filter_ele *)
+ pmd_flow->rule;
+ (void)rte_memcpy(&ntuple_filter,
+ &ntuple_filter_ptr->filter_info,
+ sizeof(struct rte_eth_ntuple_filter));
+ ret = igb_add_del_ntuple_filter(dev, &ntuple_filter, FALSE);
+ if (!ret) {
+ TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_ntuple_list,
+ ntuple_filter_ptr, entries);
+ rte_free(ntuple_filter_ptr);
+ }
+ break;
+ case RTE_ETH_FILTER_ETHERTYPE:
+ ethertype_filter_ptr = (struct igb_ethertype_filter_ele *)
+ pmd_flow->rule;
+ (void)rte_memcpy(ðertype_filter,
+ ðertype_filter_ptr->filter_info,
+ sizeof(struct rte_eth_ethertype_filter));
+ ret = igb_add_del_ethertype_filter(dev,
+ ðertype_filter, FALSE);
+ if (!ret) {
+ TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_ethertype_list,
+ ethertype_filter_ptr, entries);
+ rte_free(ethertype_filter_ptr);
+ }
+ break;
+ case RTE_ETH_FILTER_SYN:
+ syn_filter_ptr = (struct igb_eth_syn_filter_ele *)
+ pmd_flow->rule;
+ (void)rte_memcpy(&syn_filter,
+ &syn_filter_ptr->filter_info,
+ sizeof(struct rte_eth_syn_filter));
+ ret = eth_igb_syn_filter_set(dev, &syn_filter, FALSE);
+ if (!ret) {
+ TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_syn_list,
+ syn_filter_ptr, entries);
+ rte_free(syn_filter_ptr);
+ }
+ break;
+ case RTE_ETH_FILTER_FLEXIBLE:
+ flex_filter_ptr = (struct igb_flex_filter_ele *)
+ pmd_flow->rule;
+ (void)rte_memcpy(&flex_filter, &flex_filter_ptr->filter_info,
+ sizeof(struct rte_eth_flex_filter));
+ ret = eth_igb_add_del_flex_filter(dev, &flex_filter, FALSE);
+ if (!ret) {
+ TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_filter_flex_list,
+ flex_filter_ptr, entries);
+ rte_free(flex_filter_ptr);
+ }
+ break;
+ default:
+ PMD_DRV_LOG(WARNING, "Filter type (%d) not supported",
+ filter_type);
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ if (ret) {
+ rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
+ RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_HANDLE,
+ NULL, "Failed to destroy flow");
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ TAILQ_FOREACH(igb_flow_mem_ptr, &igb_flow_list, entries) {
+ if (igb_flow_mem_ptr->flow == pmd_flow) {
+ TAILQ_REMOVE(&igb_flow_list,
+ igb_flow_mem_ptr, entries);
+ rte_free(igb_flow_mem_ptr);
+ }
+ }
+ rte_free(flow);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
const struct rte_flow_ops igb_flow_ops = {
igb_flow_validate,
igb_flow_create,
- NULL,
+ igb_flow_destroy,
NULL,
NULL,
};
\ No newline at end of file