mbox series

[iwl-net,0/5] ice: LLDP support for VFs

Message ID 20240228155957.408036-1-larysa.zaremba@intel.com
Headers
Series ice: LLDP support for VFs |

Message

Larysa Zaremba Feb. 28, 2024, 3:59 p.m. UTC 
  Allow to:
* receive LLDP packets on a VF
* transmit LLDP from a VF

Only a single VF per port can transmit LLDP packets,
all trusted VFs can transmit LLDP packets.

For both functionalities to work, private flag
fw-lldp-agent must be off.

I am aware that implemented way of configuration (through sysfs) can be
potentially controversial and would like some feedback from outside.

Larysa Zaremba (1):
  ice: Do not add LLDP-specific filter

Mateusz Pacuszka (3):
  ice: Fix check for existing switch rule
  ice: Implement VF LLDP RX support on VF
  ice: Implement VF LLDP TX support for VF

Mateusz Polchlopek (1):
  ice: Add function to get VF from device struct

 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice.h          |   2 +
 .../net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_adminq_cmd.h   |   1 -
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.c   |  26 --
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_common.h   |   2 -
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_ethtool.c  |   6 +-
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c      |  83 +++++-
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.h      |   4 +
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c     |  58 ++++
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_sriov.c    |   4 +
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_switch.c   |   4 +-
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_vf_lib.c   | 252 ++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_vf_lib.h   |  26 ++
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_virtchnl.c |  11 +
 13 files changed, 439 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)

Comments

Jakub Kicinski Feb. 28, 2024, 4:47 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:59:44 +0100 Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> Allow to:
> * receive LLDP packets on a VF
> * transmit LLDP from a VF
> 
> Only a single VF per port can transmit LLDP packets,
> all trusted VFs can transmit LLDP packets.
> 
> For both functionalities to work, private flag
> fw-lldp-agent must be off.
> 
> I am aware that implemented way of configuration (through sysfs) can be
> potentially controversial and would like some feedback from outside.

Why is the device not in switchdev mode? You can put your lldp-agent
priv flag on repr netdevs.
Jiri Pirko Feb. 29, 2024, 9:20 a.m. UTC | #2 
Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 05:47:45PM CET, kuba@kernel.org wrote:
>On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:59:44 +0100 Larysa Zaremba wrote:
>> Allow to:
>> * receive LLDP packets on a VF
>> * transmit LLDP from a VF
>> 
>> Only a single VF per port can transmit LLDP packets,
>> all trusted VFs can transmit LLDP packets.
>> 
>> For both functionalities to work, private flag
>> fw-lldp-agent must be off.
>> 
>> I am aware that implemented way of configuration (through sysfs) can be
>> potentially controversial and would like some feedback from outside.
>
>Why is the device not in switchdev mode? You can put your lldp-agent
>priv flag on repr netdevs.
>

But isn't it a matter of eswitch configuration? I mean, the user should
be free to configure filtering/forwarding of any packet, including LLDP
ones.
Jakub Kicinski Feb. 29, 2024, 3:28 p.m. UTC | #3 
On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:20:05 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> But isn't it a matter of eswitch configuration? I mean, the user should
> be free to configure filtering/forwarding of any packet, including LLDP
> ones.

This is an LLDP agent which runs as part of the NIC FW, AFAIU, not about
forwarding or filtering.

They already have the priv flag, so best to reuse that. If not possible
we can explore options, but as Larysa mentioned herself in the cover
letter sysfs is probably low on the preference list :(
Larysa Zaremba Feb. 29, 2024, 7:33 p.m. UTC | #4 
On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 07:28:13AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:20:05 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > But isn't it a matter of eswitch configuration? I mean, the user should
> > be free to configure filtering/forwarding of any packet, including LLDP
> > ones.
> 
> This is an LLDP agent which runs as part of the NIC FW, AFAIU, not about
> forwarding or filtering.
> 
> They already have the priv flag, so best to reuse that. If not possible
> we can explore options, but as Larysa mentioned herself in the cover
> letter sysfs is probably low on the preference list :(
>

FW agent is disabled NIC-wide, so only PF should be able to set such flag.

The lazy part of me likes the private flag direction, because just replacing 
sysfs entries with corresponding private flags would make patch look better
while not changing the implementation much.

I guess, treating it like a normal eswitch configuration would be ideal, but 
it would not be purely generic, as there is an added level of complexity because 
of FW Agent interactions.
Jakub Kicinski March 1, 2024, 5:08 p.m. UTC | #5 
On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 20:33:04 +0100 Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > This is an LLDP agent which runs as part of the NIC FW, AFAIU, not about
> > forwarding or filtering.
> > 
> > They already have the priv flag, so best to reuse that. If not possible
> > we can explore options, but as Larysa mentioned herself in the cover
> > letter sysfs is probably low on the preference list :(
> 
> FW agent is disabled NIC-wide, so only PF should be able to set such flag.

Sorry, then I misread. If it's about which VF gets the LLDP traffic
from the _wire_, then I'm with Jiri. It's a basic forwarding problem,
isn't it? Match on EtherType and forward?

> The lazy part of me likes the private flag direction, because just
> replacing sysfs entries with corresponding private flags would make
> patch look better while not changing the implementation much.
> 
> I guess, treating it like a normal eswitch configuration would be
> ideal, but it would not be purely generic, as there is an added level
> of complexity because of FW Agent interactions.