| Message ID | 1294352011.11825.50.camel@bwh-desktop |
|---|---|
| State | RFC, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 11:22 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> On 01/04/2011 08:21 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> > On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 16:36 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >> >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:30:01 -0800 >> >> Mahesh Bandewar<maheshb@google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> This patch enables ethtool to set the loopback mode on a given interface. >> >>> By configuring the interface in loopback mode in conjunction with a policy >> >>> route / rule, a userland application can stress the egress / ingress path >> >>> exposing the flows of the change in progress and potentially help developer(s) >> >>> understand the impact of those changes without even sending a packet out >> >>> on the network. >> >>> >> >>> Following set of commands illustrates one such example - >> >>> a) ip -4 addr add 192.168.1.1/24 dev eth1 >> >>> b) ip -4 rule add from all iif eth1 lookup 250 >> >>> c) ip -4 route add local 0/0 dev lo proto kernel scope host table 250 >> >>> d) arp -Ds 192.168.1.100 eth1 >> >>> e) arp -Ds 192.168.1.200 eth1 >> >>> f) sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1 >> >>> g) sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.all.accept_local=1 >> >>> # Assuming that the machine has 8 cores >> >>> h) taskset 000f netserver -L 192.168.1.200 >> >>> i) taskset 00f0 netperf -t TCP_CRR -L 192.168.1.100 -H 192.168.1.200 -l 30 >> >>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar<maheshb@google.com> >> >>> Reviewed-by: Ben Hutchings<bhutchings@solarflare.com> >> >> >> >> Since this is a boolean it SHOULD go into ethtool_flags rather than >> >> being a high level operation. >> > >> > It could do, but I though ETHTOOL_{G,S}FLAGS were intended for >> > controlling offload features. >> >> It doesn't have to be. As Stephen guessed, [GS]FLAGS are basically >> common flags -- as differentiated from private, >> driver-specific/hardware-specific flags. > > Well, that would allow the patch to be simplified quite a bit. :-) Ben, Are you suggesting to use ETH_FLAG_LOOPBACK instead of ETHTOOL_{G|S}LOOPBACK flags? Thanks, --mahesh.. > > Ben. > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> > Subject: [PATCH net-2.6] ethtool: Define ETH_FLAG_LOOPBACK > Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:10:55 +0000 > > Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@google.com> requested this, writing: > > By configuring the interface in loopback mode in conjunction with a policy > route / rule, a userland application can stress the egress / ingress path > exposing the flows of the change in progress and potentially help developer(s) > understand the impact of those changes without even sending a packet out > on the network. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> > > --- a/include/linux/ethtool.h > +++ b/include/linux/ethtool.h > @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ struct ethtool_perm_addr { > * flag differs from the read-only value. > */ > enum ethtool_flags { > + ETH_FLAG_LOOPBACK = (1 << 2), /* Host-side loopback enabled */ > ETH_FLAG_TXVLAN = (1 << 7), /* TX VLAN offload enabled */ > ETH_FLAG_RXVLAN = (1 << 8), /* RX VLAN offload enabled */ > ETH_FLAG_LRO = (1 << 15), /* LRO is enabled */ > --- > > -- > Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications > Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. > They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 11:22 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> On 01/04/2011 08:21 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> > On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 16:36 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >> >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:30:01 -0800 >> >> Mahesh Bandewar<maheshb@google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> This patch enables ethtool to set the loopback mode on a given interface. >> >>> By configuring the interface in loopback mode in conjunction with a policy >> >>> route / rule, a userland application can stress the egress / ingress path >> >>> exposing the flows of the change in progress and potentially help developer(s) >> >>> understand the impact of those changes without even sending a packet out >> >>> on the network. >> >>> >> >>> Following set of commands illustrates one such example - >> >>> a) ip -4 addr add 192.168.1.1/24 dev eth1 >> >>> b) ip -4 rule add from all iif eth1 lookup 250 >> >>> c) ip -4 route add local 0/0 dev lo proto kernel scope host table 250 >> >>> d) arp -Ds 192.168.1.100 eth1 >> >>> e) arp -Ds 192.168.1.200 eth1 >> >>> f) sysctl -w net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1 >> >>> g) sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.all.accept_local=1 >> >>> # Assuming that the machine has 8 cores >> >>> h) taskset 000f netserver -L 192.168.1.200 >> >>> i) taskset 00f0 netperf -t TCP_CRR -L 192.168.1.100 -H 192.168.1.200 -l 30 >> >>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar<maheshb@google.com> >> >>> Reviewed-by: Ben Hutchings<bhutchings@solarflare.com> >> >> >> >> Since this is a boolean it SHOULD go into ethtool_flags rather than >> >> being a high level operation. >> > >> > It could do, but I though ETHTOOL_{G,S}FLAGS were intended for >> > controlling offload features. >> >> It doesn't have to be. As Stephen guessed, [GS]FLAGS are basically >> common flags -- as differentiated from private, >> driver-specific/hardware-specific flags. > > Well, that would allow the patch to be simplified quite a bit. :-) > > Ben. > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> > Subject: [PATCH net-2.6] ethtool: Define ETH_FLAG_LOOPBACK > Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 22:10:55 +0000 > > Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@google.com> requested this, writing: > > By configuring the interface in loopback mode in conjunction with a policy > route / rule, a userland application can stress the egress / ingress path > exposing the flows of the change in progress and potentially help developer(s) > understand the impact of those changes without even sending a packet out > on the network. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@google.com> > > --- a/include/linux/ethtool.h > +++ b/include/linux/ethtool.h > @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ struct ethtool_perm_addr { > * flag differs from the read-only value. > */ > enum ethtool_flags { > + ETH_FLAG_LOOPBACK = (1 << 2), /* Host-side loopback enabled */ > ETH_FLAG_TXVLAN = (1 << 7), /* TX VLAN offload enabled */ > ETH_FLAG_RXVLAN = (1 << 8), /* RX VLAN offload enabled */ > ETH_FLAG_LRO = (1 << 15), /* LRO is enabled */ > --- I tried this one with e1000e driver changes. It works but the ethtool changes are not very clean and I would still prefer the earlier patch since changes are clean across the board. I'll post ethtool changes soon. > > -- > Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications > Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. > They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--- a/include/linux/ethtool.h +++ b/include/linux/ethtool.h @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ struct ethtool_perm_addr { * flag differs from the read-only value. */ enum ethtool_flags { + ETH_FLAG_LOOPBACK = (1 << 2), /* Host-side loopback enabled */ ETH_FLAG_TXVLAN = (1 << 7), /* TX VLAN offload enabled */ ETH_FLAG_RXVLAN = (1 << 8), /* RX VLAN offload enabled */ ETH_FLAG_LRO = (1 << 15), /* LRO is enabled */