Skip to content

L
linux
Switch branch/tag
  1. 22 Jun, 2022 19 commits
  3. 21 Jun, 2022 15 commits
  5. 20 Jun, 2022 6 commits
    • David S. Miller's avatar
      Merge branch 'mlxsw-unified-bridge-conversion-part-1' · 4336487e
      David S. Miller authored 
      Ido Schimmel says:

====================
mlxsw: Unified bridge conversion - part 1/6

This set starts converting mlxsw to the unified bridge model and mainly
adds new device registers and extends existing ones that will be used in
follow-up patchsets.

High-level summary
==================

The unified bridge model is a new way of managing low-level device
objects such as filtering identifiers (FIDs). The conversion moves a lot
of logic out of the device's firmware towards the driver, but its main
selling point is that it allows to overcome various scalability issues
related to the amount of entries that need to be programmed to the
device.

The only (intended) user visible changes of the conversion are
improvement in resource utilization and ability to support more router
interfaces (RIFs) in Spectrum-{2,3}.

Details
=======

Commit 50853808 ("Merge branch
'mlxsw-Prepare-for-VLAN-aware-bridge-w-VxLAN'") converted mlxsw to
emulate 802.1Q FIDs (represent VLANs in a VLAN-aware bridge) using
802.1D FIDs (represent VLAN-unaware bridges). This was necessary because
at that time VNI could not be assigned to 802.1Q FIDs, which effectively
meant that mlxsw could not support VXLAN with VLAN-aware bridges.

The downside of this approach is that multiple {Port,VID}->FID entries
are required in order to classify incoming traffic to a FID, as opposed
to a single VID->FID entry that can be used with actual 802.1Q FIDs.

For example, if 10 ports are members in the same VLAN-aware bridge and
the same 100 VLANs are configured on each port, then only 100 VID->FID
entries are required with 802.1Q FIDs, whereas 1000 {Port,VID}->FID
entries are required with emulated 802.1Q FIDs.

The above limitation is the result of various assumptions that were made
in the design of the API that was exposed to software. In the unified
bridge model the API is much more "raw" and therefore avoids these
assumptions, allowing software to configure the device in a more
efficient manner.
====================
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      4336487e
    • Amit Cohen's avatar
      mlxsw: reg: Add support for VLAN RIF as part of RITR register · b3820922
      Amit Cohen authored 
      Router interfaces (RIFs) constructed on top of VLAN-aware bridges are of
"VLAN" type, whereas RIFs constructed on top of VLAN-unaware bridges of
"FID" type.

In other words, the RIF type is derived from the underlying FID type.
VLAN RIFs are used on top of 802.1Q FIDs, whereas FID RIFs are used on
top of 802.1D FIDs.

Currently 802.1Q FIDs are emulated using 802.1D FIDs, and therefore VLAN
RIFs are emulated using FID RIFs.

As part of converting the driver to use unified bridge, 802.1Q FIDs and
VLAN RIFs will be used.

Add the relevant fields to RITR register, add pack() function for VLAN
RIF and rename one field to fit the internal name.
Signed-off-by: default avatarAmit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarPetr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIdo Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      b3820922
    • Amit Cohen's avatar
      mlxsw: Add support for egress FID classification after decapsulation · 1b1c198c
      Amit Cohen authored 
      As preparation for unified bridge model, add support for VNI->FID mapping
via SVFA register.

When performing VXLAN encapsulation, the VXLAN header needs to contain a
VNI. This VNI is derived from the FID classification performed on
ingress, through which the ingress RIF is also determined.

Similarly, when performing VXLAN decapsulation, the FID of the packet
needs to be determined. This FID is derived from VNI classification
performed during decapsulation.

In the old model, both entries (i.e., FID->VNI and VNI->FID) were
configured via SFMR.vni.

In the new model, where ingress is separated from egress, ingress
configuration (VNI->FID) is performed via SVFA, while SFMR only
configures egress (FID->VNI).

Add 'vni' field to SVFA, add new mapping table - VNI to FID, add new
pack() function for VNI mapping and edit the comment in SFMR.
Signed-off-by: default avatarAmit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarDanielle Ratson <danieller@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarPetr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIdo Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      1b1c198c
    • Amit Cohen's avatar
      mlxsw: reg: Add egress FID field to RITR register · ad9592c0
      Amit Cohen authored 
      RITR configures the router interface table. As preparation for unified
bridge model, add egress FID field to RITR.

After routing, a packet has to perform a layer-2 lookup using the
destination MAC it got from the routing and a FID.
In the new model, the egress FID is configured by RITR for both sub-port
and FID RIFs.

Add 'efid' field to sub-port router interface and update FID router
interface related comment.
Signed-off-by: default avatarAmit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarPetr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIdo Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      ad9592c0
    • Amit Cohen's avatar
      mlxsw: reg: Add Router Egress Interface to VID Register · 27f0b6ce
      Amit Cohen authored 
      The REIV maps {egress router interface (eRIF), egress_port} -> {vlan ID}.
As preparation for unified bridge model, add REIV register for future use.

In the past, firmware would take care of the above mentioned mapping,
but in the new model this should be done by software using REIV register.

REIV register supports a simultaneous update of 256 ports using
'port_page' field. When 'port_page'=0 the records represent ports
0-255, when 'port_page'=1 the records represent ports 256-511 and so
on.

The register is reserved while using the legacy model.
Signed-off-by: default avatarAmit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarPetr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIdo Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      27f0b6ce
    • Amit Cohen's avatar
      mlxsw: reg: Replace MID related fields in SFGC register · 48bca94f
      Amit Cohen authored 
      SFGC register maps {packet type, bridge type} -> {MID base, table type}.
As preparation for unified bridge model, remove 'mid' field and add
'mid_base' field.

The MID index (index to PGT table which maps MID to local port list and
SMPE index) is a result of 'mid_base' + 'fid_offset'. Using the legacy
bridge model, firmware configures 'mid_base'. However, using the new model,
software is responsible to configure it via SFGC register.

The 'mid_base' is configured per {packet type, bridge type}, for
example, for {Unicast, .1Q}, {Broadcast, .1D}.

Add the field 'mid_base' to SFGC register and increase the length of the
register accordingly.

Remove the field 'mid' as currently it is ignored by the device, its use
is an old leftover.
Signed-off-by: default avatarAmit Cohen <amcohen@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarPetr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarIdo Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      48bca94f
GitLab Nexedi Edition | About GitLab | About Nexedi | 沪ICP备2021021310号-2 | 沪ICP备2021021310号-7