On 11/26/20 12:43 AM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
Current sample test xdp_redirect_map only count pkts on ingress. But we
can't know whether the pkts are redirected or dropped. So add a counter
on egress interface so we could know how many pkts are redirect in fact.
sample result:
$ ./xdp_redirect_map -X veth1 veth2
input: 5 output: 6
libbpf: elf: skipping unrecognized data section(9) .rodata.str1.16
libbpf: elf: skipping unrecognized data section(23) .eh_frame
libbpf: elf: skipping relo section(24) .rel.eh_frame for section(23) .eh_frame
in ifindex 5: 1 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 1 pkt/s
in ifindex 5: 1 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 1 pkt/s
in ifindex 5: 0 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 0 pkt/s
in ifindex 5: 68 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 68 pkt/s
in ifindex 5: 91 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 91 pkt/s
in ifindex 5: 91 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 91 pkt/s
in ifindex 5: 66 pkt/s, out ifindex 6: 66 pkt/s
Signed-off-by: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
v2:
a) use pkt counter instead of IP ttl modification on egress program
b) make the egress program selectable by option -X
---
samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_kern.c | 26 +++--
samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_user.c | 142 ++++++++++++++++++----------
2 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
diff --git a/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_kern.c b/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_kern.c
index 6489352ab7a4..fd6704a4f7e2 100644
--- a/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_kern.c
+++ b/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_kern.c
@@ -22,19 +22,19 @@
struct {
__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_DEVMAP);
__uint(key_size, sizeof(int));
- __uint(value_size, sizeof(int));
+ __uint(value_size, sizeof(struct bpf_devmap_val));
__uint(max_entries, 100);
} tx_port SEC(".maps");
-/* Count RX packets, as XDP bpf_prog doesn't get direct TX-success
- * feedback. Redirect TX errors can be caught via a tracepoint.
+/* Count RX/TX packets, use key 0 for rx pkt count, key 1 for tx
+ * pkt count.
*/
struct {
__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY);
__type(key, u32);
__type(value, long);
- __uint(max_entries, 1);
-} rxcnt SEC(".maps");
+ __uint(max_entries, 2);
+} pktcnt SEC(".maps");
static void swap_src_dst_mac(void *data)
{
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ int xdp_redirect_map_prog(struct xdp_md *ctx)
vport = 0;
/* count packet in global counter */
- value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&rxcnt, &key);
+ value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&pktcnt, &key);
if (value)
*value += 1;
@@ -82,6 +82,20 @@ int xdp_redirect_map_prog(struct xdp_md *ctx)
return bpf_redirect_map(&tx_port, vport, 0);
}
+SEC("xdp_devmap/map_prog")
+int xdp_devmap_prog(struct xdp_md *ctx)
+{
+ long *value;
+ u32 key = 1;
+
+ /* count packet in global counter */
+ value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&pktcnt, &key);
+ if (value)
+ *value += 1;
+
+ return XDP_PASS;
+}
+
/* Redirect require an XDP bpf_prog loaded on the TX device */
SEC("xdp_redirect_dummy")
int xdp_redirect_dummy_prog(struct xdp_md *ctx)
diff --git a/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_user.c b/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_user.c
index 35e16dee613e..8bdec0865e1d 100644
--- a/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_user.c
+++ b/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_map_user.c
@@ -21,12 +21,13 @@
static int ifindex_in;
static int ifindex_out;
-static bool ifindex_out_xdp_dummy_attached = true;
+static bool ifindex_out_xdp_dummy_attached = false;
+static bool xdp_prog_attached = false;
Maybe xdp_devmap_prog_attached? Feel xdp_prog_attached
is too generic since actually it controls xdp_devmap program
attachment.
static __u32 prog_id;
static __u32 dummy_prog_id;
static __u32 xdp_flags = XDP_FLAGS_UPDATE_IF_NOEXIST;
-static int rxcnt_map_fd;
+static int pktcnt_map_fd;
static void int_exit(int sig)
{
@@ -60,26 +61,46 @@ static void int_exit(int sig)
exit(0);
}
-static void poll_stats(int interval, int ifindex)
+static void poll_stats(int interval, int if_ingress, int if_egress)
{
unsigned int nr_cpus = bpf_num_possible_cpus();
- __u64 values[nr_cpus], prev[nr_cpus];
+ __u64 values[nr_cpus], in_prev[nr_cpus], e_prev[nr_cpus];
+ __u64 sum;
+ __u32 key;
+ int i;
- memset(prev, 0, sizeof(prev));
+ memset(in_prev, 0, sizeof(in_prev));
+ memset(e_prev, 0, sizeof(e_prev));
while (1) {
- __u64 sum = 0;
- __u32 key = 0;
- int i;
+ sum = 0;
+ key = 0;
sleep(interval);
- assert(bpf_map_lookup_elem(rxcnt_map_fd, &key, values) == 0);
- for (i = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++)
- sum += (values[i] - prev[i]);
- if (sum)
- printf("ifindex %i: %10llu pkt/s\n",
- ifindex, sum / interval);
- memcpy(prev, values, sizeof(values));
+ if (bpf_map_lookup_elem(pktcnt_map_fd, &key, values) == 0) {
When we could have a failure here? If it indeed failed maybe it signals
something wrong and the process should fail?
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++)
+ sum += (values[i] - in_prev[i]);
+ if (sum)
+ printf("in ifindex %i: %10llu pkt/s",
+ if_ingress, sum / interval);
+ memcpy(in_prev, values, sizeof(values));
+ }
+
+ if (!xdp_prog_attached) {
+ printf("\n");
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ sum = 0;
+ key = 1;
+ if (bpf_map_lookup_elem(pktcnt_map_fd, &key, values) == 0) {
same as the above, if bpf_map_lookup_elem() failed, maybe we should
signal a failure?
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_cpus; i++)
+ sum += (values[i] - e_prev[i]);
+ if (sum)
+ printf(", out ifindex %i: %10llu pkt/s\n",
+ if_egress, sum / interval);
+ memcpy(e_prev, values, sizeof(values));
+ }
}
}
[...]
