qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH V5 1/3] net/filter: Optimize transfer protocol for filter-mir


From: Jason Wang
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/3] net/filter: Optimize transfer protocol for filter-mirror/redirector
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2021 11:16:58 +0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0


在 2021/11/4 下午1:37, Zhang, Chen 写道:

I wonder if we need to introduce new parameter, e.g force_vnet_hdr
here, then we can always send vnet_hdr when it is enabled.

Otherwise the "vnet_hdr_support" seems meaningless.
Yes, Current "vnet_hdr_support"  default enabled, and vnet_hdr_len
already forced from attached nf->netdev.
Maybe we can introduce a new parameter "force_no_vnet_hdr" here to
make the vnet_hdr_len always keep 0.
If you think OK, I will update it in next version.
Let me explain, if I was not wrong:

"vnet_hdr_support" means whether or not to send vnet header length. If
vnet_hdr_support=false, we won't send the vnet header. This looks the
same as you "force_no_vent_hdr" above.
Yes, It was.  But this series changed it.
Current "vnet_hdr_support" can't decide whether send vnet header length,
we always send it even 0.
It will avoid sender/receiver transfer protocol parse issues:
When sender data with the vnet header length, but receiver can't enable the
"vnet_hdr_support".
Filters will auto setup vnet_hdr_len as local nf->netdev and found the issue
when get different vnet_hdr_len from other filters.

And my "force_vnet_hdr" seems duplicated with vnet_hdr_support=true.
So it looks to me we can leave the mirror code as is and just change
the compare? (depends on the mgmt to set a correct vnet_hdr_support)
OK, I will keep the filter-mirror/filter-redirector/filter-rewriter same as this
version.
For the colo-compare module, It will get primary node's filter data's
vnet_hdr_len as the local value, And compare with secondary node's,
because it is not attached any nf->netdev.
So, it looks compare module's "vnet_hdr_support" been auto configuration
from the filter transport protocol.
If the "force_vnet_hdr" means hard code a compare's local vnet_hdr_len
rather than come from input filter's data?

Thanks
Chen

Hi Jason/Markus,

Rethink about it, How about keep the original "vnet_hdr_support" function,
And add a new optional parameter "auto_vnet_hdr" for filters/compare?


It's a way but rethink of the whole thing. I wonder what if we just enable "vnet_hdr_support" by default for filter and colo-compare?

Thanks



Thanks
Chen


Thanks

Thanks
Chen

Thanks






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]