On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:21 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Are the XDP_REDIRECT (target) and XDP_TX going to the same rings? > The locking seems to be missing, and bnxt_tx_int_xdp() does not > seem to be able to handle the optimization you described if > a ring contains a mix of XDP_REDIRECT and XDP_TX. XDP_REDIRECT mixed with XDP_TX won't work well currently. It was briefly mentioned on the list a few months ago: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CACKFLin+1whPs0qeM5xBb1yXx8FkFS_vGrW6PaGy41_XVH=SGg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Yes, they share the same set of TX rings in the current code. My plan is to have a set of dedicated TX rings for XDP_REDIRECT. Adding locking to properly support XDP_REDIRECT and XDP_TX seems not ideal for performance.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
