net: pkt_filter: Add priority filters to enable quality of service #93341

ClaCodes · 2025-07-18T16:17:54Z

Quality of Service for Ethernet

To enable quality-of-service (QoS) applications, add net_pkt_filters with result NET_CONTINUE, that allow to change the priority of an incoming packet dynamically. Then the processing of a network packet will happen on the respective traffic-class-queue. This enables a gradual degrading of availabilit of a service based on its priority (user application configurable).

Results (Sample in this PR)

With QoS

c (x) := command service for priority x (high means higher priority)

e (x) := echo service for priority x (high means higher priority)

Without QoS

c (x) := command service for priority x (high means higher priority)

e (x) := echo service for priority x (high means higher priority)

Future Work

Implement deferring before net_conn_input
QoS for UDP
QoS for TCP

rlubos

Some initial feedback (on the topmost 2 commits).

subsys/net/ip/net_tc.c

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c

ClaCodes · 2025-07-24T16:49:56Z

@rlubos
I reverted along the lines of discussion.
Note that, if we go with the current approach of the RFC, we would have to add the snippet to multiple places:

+               update_priority_l2(pkt);
+               if (!being_processed_by_correct_thread(pkt)) {
+                       net_queue_rx(net_pkt_iface(pkt), pkt);
+                       return NET_OK;
+               }

For example after extracting the l2-header but before: STRUCT_SECTION_FOREACH(net_l3_register, l3) { such that for example arp packets can be offloaded on to another traffic class queue.
and after ip-header processing etc ...

I believe, that a loop and a if-else-chain or a switch would be more readable. Presumably the added computation cost is negligible?

void process_data(struct net_pkt *pkt)
{
    // switch would only work if raw packet sockets not needed for loop back etc.
    switch (pkt->step) {
    case STEP_1:
        do_step_1();
        return NET_CONTINUE;
    case STEP_2:
        do_step_2();
        return NET_CONTINUE;
    case STEP_3:
        do_step_3();
        return NET_CONTINUE;
        // ...
    }
}

void processing_data(struct net_pkt *pkt)
{
    enum net_verdict verdict = NET_CONTINUE;
    do {
        verdict = process_data(pkt);
        if (verdict != NET_CONTINUE) {
            break;
        }
        update_prio(pkt, pkt->step);
        if (!on_correct_thread(pkt)) {
            net_queue_rx(pkt);
            verdict = NET_OK;
        }
    } while (verdict == NET_CONTINUE);
    // ... unref
}

If we do not do this, it will be very hard to follow at which point the processing can be interrupted and then recontinued later. This may be an easy source of bugs.

ClaCodes · 2025-08-16T09:03:38Z

Rebased

Note: contains all commits from #93246 and adds two commit

sonarqubecloud · 2025-08-16T09:39:28Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
1.6% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

rlubos

I think packet rescheduling logic turned out pretty straightforward and looks fine, however I think we need to think on how would the priority updating look like in practice.

subsys/net/ip/net_tc.c

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c

tpambor · 2025-09-24T15:41:44Z

@ClaCodes Could you rebase this PR as the prerequisites #93246 and #93050 have been merged

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:43:33Z

include/zephyr/net/net_pkt_filter.h

 struct npf_rule {
 	sys_snode_t node;               /**< Slist rule list node */
 	enum net_verdict result;	/**< result if all tests pass */
+	uint8_t priority;		/**< priority in case of NET_CONTINUE */


Please put the filter changes to a separate commit

done: 0f0ed9a

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:43:56Z

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c

 	if (!pkt->frags) {
 		NET_DBG("Corrupted packet (frags %p)", pkt->frags);
 		net_stats_update_processing_error(net_pkt_iface(pkt));
-


unrelated change, please remove

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:44:56Z

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c

 				net_stats_update_processing_error(
 							net_pkt_iface(pkt));
 			}
-


same here, and actually it is be preferred that there is an empty line after closing block (so the original code is ok)

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:45:43Z

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c

-
 			return ret;
 		}
+		if (!being_processed_by_correct_thread(pkt)) {


like here, it would be preferred if there is empty line before the added if statement

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:46:02Z

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c

 	return NET_DROP;
 }

+


Please remove this extra empty line

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:46:59Z

subsys/net/pkt_filter/base.c


 	SYS_SLIST_FOR_EACH_CONTAINER(rule_head, rule, node) {
 		if (apply_tests(rule, pkt) == true) {
+			if (rule->result == NET_CONTINUE) {


As mentioned earlier, the filter changes should be in separate commit

done: 0f0ed9a

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:48:49Z

subsys/net/ip/net_tc.c

 #elif defined(CONFIG_NET_TC_THREAD_COOPERATIVE)
 #define BASE_PRIO_TX (CONFIG_NET_TC_NUM_PRIORITIES - 1)
 #else
 #define BASE_PRIO_TX (CONFIG_NET_TC_TX_COUNT - 1)


I did not understand the purpose of the commit net: tc: WIP/TEMP spread threads by more then 1 priority level. Anyway, the commit is WIP so I am assuming the idea comes in subsequent revisions.

Yes. I detailed the commit now.

Basically, without the commit the spacing between the tc-thread priorities must be one. The commit allows to modify it, so that the application writer may interleave with other threads. In the sample for example to alternate between rx and tx thread for nice result, that i now added to the description.

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:50:44Z

samples/net/QoS/ethernet/src/main.c

+{
+	int res;
+	struct net_pkt *pkt = NULL;
+


extra empty line can be removed

jukkar · 2025-10-16T12:51:27Z

samples/net/QoS/ethernet/src/main.c

+	copy_mac_to(dest);
+
+	pkt = net_pkt_rx_alloc_with_buffer(iface, MTU, AF_UNSPEC, 0, K_NO_WAIT);
+	if (!pkt) {


please write these checks like this if (pkt == NULL) { because of MISRA rule

To enable quality-of-service (QoS) applications, allow filters to modify the priority of an incoming packet. This allows that processing can be done on tc-queue-threads with different priorities. Signed-off-by: Cla Mattia Galliard <[email protected]>

Allow to spread tc threads by more then one priority level and cleanup the computation of the priority. Signed-off-by: Cla Mattia Galliard <[email protected]>

ClaCodes · 2025-10-16T17:28:42Z

updated description and title

Add a sample, that shows the power of quality of service in Zephyr. Signed-off-by: Cla Mattia Galliard <[email protected]>

ClaCodes · 2025-10-16T17:37:43Z

any suggestion for the doc build?

sonarqubecloud · 2025-10-16T17:42:33Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
8 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

zephyrbot added the area: Networking label Jul 18, 2025

zephyrbot requested review from jukkar, pdgendt, rlubos and ssharks July 18, 2025 16:18

zephyrbot assigned rlubos and jukkar Jul 18, 2025

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch 4 times, most recently from 26d64cc to a4849f5 Compare July 19, 2025 12:37

rlubos reviewed Jul 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch 5 times, most recently from c5f9c6c to 9bd6ae9 Compare July 24, 2025 16:36

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from 9bd6ae9 to d88b7ac Compare July 25, 2025 05:56

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from d88b7ac to 80f5552 Compare August 16, 2025 09:03

ClaCodes mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2025

net_pkt: Store meta-information of processing in the net_pkt #93298

Closed

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from 80f5552 to a69163e Compare August 16, 2025 09:35

ClaCodes requested a review from rlubos August 16, 2025 09:37

rlubos reviewed Aug 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

subsys/net/ip/net_tc.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

subsys/net/ip/net_core.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from a69163e to 43cf73c Compare September 27, 2025 16:30

zephyrbot added area: Logging area: Samples Samples labels Sep 27, 2025

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch 6 times, most recently from f6a7bcb to 9f98615 Compare September 30, 2025 09:58

zephyrbot added area: Linker Scripts area: Build System labels Sep 30, 2025

zephyrbot requested a review from tejlmand September 30, 2025 10:00

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from 9f98615 to e301b1b Compare October 11, 2025 20:40

zephyrbot requested a review from rlubos October 11, 2025 20:42

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch 6 times, most recently from 461d453 to 74a0377 Compare October 14, 2025 21:09

jukkar reviewed Oct 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

ClaCodes added 2 commits October 16, 2025 19:18

net: tc: allow to spread threads by more then 1 priority level

1a662cf

Allow to spread tc threads by more then one priority level and cleanup the computation of the priority. Signed-off-by: Cla Mattia Galliard <[email protected]>

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from 74a0377 to f068f37 Compare October 16, 2025 17:19

zephyrbot requested a review from jukkar October 16, 2025 17:20

ClaCodes changed the title ~~RFC: net: core: Dynamic priority and deferred processing~~ net: pkt_filter: Add priority filters to enable quality of service Oct 16, 2025

ClaCodes mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2025

log: output: log thread priority #97403

Open

ClaCodes requested a review from tpambor October 16, 2025 17:36

samples: net: QoS: Add quality of service sample

48a6dea

Add a sample, that shows the power of quality of service in Zephyr. Signed-off-by: Cla Mattia Galliard <[email protected]>

ClaCodes force-pushed the feature/delay_processing branch from f068f37 to 48a6dea Compare October 16, 2025 17:37

net: pkt_filter: Add priority filters to enable quality of service #93341

Are you sure you want to change the base?

net: pkt_filter: Add priority filters to enable quality of service #93341

Conversation

ClaCodes commented Jul 18, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Quality of Service for Ethernet

Results (Sample in this PR)

With QoS

Without QoS

Future Work

Uh oh!

rlubos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ClaCodes commented Jul 24, 2025

Uh oh!

ClaCodes commented Aug 16, 2025

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Aug 16, 2025

Quality Gate passed

Uh oh!

rlubos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tpambor commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ClaCodes commented Oct 16, 2025

Uh oh!

ClaCodes commented Oct 16, 2025

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 16, 2025

Quality Gate passed

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

ClaCodes commented Jul 18, 2025 •

edited

Loading