[Cake] [PATCH net-next 1/5] sch_cake: fix IP protocol handling in the presence of VLAN tags

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

Davide Caratti <dcaratti at redhat.com> writes:

> hi Toke,
>
> thanks for answering.
>
> On Fri, 2020-06-26 at 14:52 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Davide Caratti <dcaratti at redhat.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> > 
>> > >  I guess I can trying going through them all and figuring out if
>> > > there's a more generic solution.
>> > 
>> > For sch_cake, I think that the qdisc shouldn't look at the IP header when
>> > it schedules packets having a VLAN tag.
>> > 
>> > Probably, when tc_skb_protocol() returns ETH_P_8021Q or ETH_P_8021AD, we
>> > should look at the VLAN priority (PCP) bits (and that's something that
>> > cake doesn't do currently - but I have a small patch in my stash that
>> > implements this: please let me know if you are interested in seeing it :)
>> > ).
>> > 
>> > Then, to ensure that the IP precedence is respected, even with different
>> > VLAN tags, users should explicitly configure TC filters that "map" the
>> > DSCP value to a PCP value. This would ensure that configured priority is
>> > respected by the scheduler, and would also be flexible enough to allow
>> > different "mappings".
>> 
>> I think you have this the wrong way around :)
>> 
>> I.e., classifying based on VLAN priority is even more esoteric than
>> using diffserv markings,
>
> is it so uncommon? I knew that almost every wifi card did something
> similar with 802.11 'access categories'. More generally, I'm not sure if
> it's ok to ignore any QoS information present in the L2 header. Anyway,
>
>> so that should not be the default. Making it
>> the default would also make the behaviour change for the same traffic if
>> there's a VLAN tag present, which is bound to confuse people. I suppose
>> it could be an option, but not really sure that's needed, since as you
>> say you could just implement it with your own TC filters...
>
> you caught me :) ,
>
> I wrote that patch in my stash to fix cake on my home router, where voice
> and data are encapsulated in IP over PPPoE over VLANs, and different
> services go over different VLAN ids (one VLAN dedicated for voice, the
> other one for data) [1]. The quickest thing I did was: to prioritize
> packets having VLAN id equal to 1035.
>
> Now that I look at cake code again (where again means: after almost 1
> year) it would be probably better to assign skb->priority using flower +
> act_skbedit, and then prioritize in the qdisc: if I read the code well,
> this would avoid voice and data falling into the same traffic class (that
> was my original problem).
>
> please note: I didn't try this patch - but I think that even with this
> code I would have voice and data mixed together, because there is PPPoE
> between VLAN and IP.
>
>> > Sure, my proposal does not cover the problem of mangling the CE bit
>> > inside VLAN-tagged packets, i.e. if we should understand if qdiscs
>> > should allow it or not.
>> 
>> Hmm, yeah, that's the rub, isn't it? I think this is related to this
>> commit, which first introduced tc_skb_protocol():
>> 
>> d8b9605d2697 ("net: sched: fix skb->protocol use in case of accelerated vlan path")
>> 
>> That commit at least made the behaviour consistent across
>> accelerated/non-accelerated VLANs. However, the patch description
>> asserts that 'tc code .. expects vlan protocol type [in skb->protocol]'.
>> Looking at the various callers, I'm not actually sure that's true, in
>> the sense that most of the callers don't handle VLAN ethertypes at all,
>> but expects to find an IP header. This is the case for at least:
>> 
>> - act_ctinfo
>> - act_skbedit
>> - cls_flow
>> - em_ipset
>> - em_ipt
>> - sch_cake
>> - sch_dsmark
>
> sure, I'm not saying it's not possible to look inside IP headers. What I
> understood from Cong's replies [2], and he sort-of convinced me, was: when
> I have IP and one or more VLAN tags, no matter whether it is accelerated
> or not, it should be sufficient to access the IP header daisy-chaining
> 'act_vlan pop actions' -> access to the IP header -> ' act_vlan push
> actions (in the reversed order).
>
> oh well, that's still not sufficient in my home router because of PPPoE. I
> should practice with cls_bpf more seriously :-) 
>
> or write act_pppoe.c :D
>
>> In fact the only caller that explicitly handles a VLAN ethertype seems
>> to be act_csum; and that handles it in a way that also just skips the
>> VLAN headers, albeit by skb_pull()'ing the header.
>
>
>> cls_api, em_meta and sch_teql don't explicitly handle it; but returning
>> the VLAN ethertypes to those does seem to make sense, since they just
>> pass the value somewhere else.
>> 
>> So my suggestion would be to add a new helper that skips the VLAN tags
>> and finds the L3 ethertype (i.e., basically cake_skb_proto() as
>> introduced in this patch), then switch all the callers listed above, as
>> well as the INET_ECN_set_ce() over to using that. Maybe something like
>> 'skb_l3_protocol()' which could go into skbuff.h itself, so the ECN code
>> can also find it?
>
> for setting the CE bit, that's understandable - in one way or the other,
> the behaviour should be made consistent.
>
>> Any objections to this? It's not actually clear to me how the discussion
>> you quoted above landed; but this will at least make things consistent
>> across all the different actions/etc.
>
> well, it just didn't "land". But I agree, inconsistency here can make some
> TC configurations "unreliable" (i.e., they don't do the job they were
> configured for).

Right, I'll send a patch to try to make all this consistent :)

-Toke