From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2C1DC32753 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 20:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A25232083B for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 20:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="MdZWJqAH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729719AbfHNUvj (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:51:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:44298 "EHLO mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728777AbfHNUvj (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Aug 2019 16:51:39 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id t14so125698plr.11 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:51:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MEnN9cIkoprgGXZCvLAId1lzXJ/S4r3niCBe1YQXTy0=; b=MdZWJqAHrl9ARqMkSb5qxqaRLJdN45KgdIAXDLXqxXmoWALiG20tiCPDJTFneqJC3D 4nZdXoZUhxtl8fW3Gk0ibOEA8zsFCiiaUn3xdMkKnD6d79wGv54d2vFvywhfi4jrYhzV GqX5cK3hLDRZuIy+2XR2/QhY7zOe7wKBMeKqMUkQm5/33U2EyVJdyPfzAIk1LLOpIyZf +EqsIZ7GPmrc+xk5UeOnh9E3HblpEkLPMrKcO6duTldugFeZIEK8pafLtMTgNEwhXgWv maXLm1Ues0xmhCEbt0bpqBYpiBsBIKFHiDMuCeudyt7RxNpKkcZ2c9XBzAQkTpv/L3po UPsw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MEnN9cIkoprgGXZCvLAId1lzXJ/S4r3niCBe1YQXTy0=; b=QXTlA6WzHJC2z9oTcD8mCLUvSrmX/TadqlvNDlIprHjJk8nN3bfP8S35KTkNrgb5kt fCrrSQDDa8rUuk6mUpulP3SAUDPKY5gpexMf+1esTEbjHEg9mr1KyoYkYK9doKq97G6o /VOkbejr2M1v2Wyws+YRqy4cACdA2rIOmjiExiNz9tYmYz1+jO+rp4ia+nbfnJEousuG phmcswmwqJrIPQZJnE+E7grtkB0jmwIoQ35IRKfgtqPS2Gc3lnaqJSjqpagf29Jeq+9U C+ouYRGQj/7syP1E35VZL2qg3uumphW4gZiVIGTAiM0dHP8dfoKfHSck8eyKwAxt9osh EvAA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXXWgROFe0LCjH8icI+orkvtnUg1RcOwtaHfm0CTpiOzuOX/9RL MLeWwPMs5ZjRCoWNLrtV05BexcHl9R61ptO+txgixktD X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyWimjHWiPhdHszTv+d5Dv/M7Uq7RTTuk3UxMJ/Z6q/WbBkJnME9bJnCmWIXkJkMXewIWxLvAMGfUCdCTrOX5s= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7286:: with SMTP id d6mr1186743pll.61.1565815898371; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:51:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Cong Wang Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 13:51:27 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: tc - mirred ingress not supported at the moment To: Martin Olsson Cc: netdev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 2:02 AM Martin Olsson wrote: > > Hi Cong! > > Ah sorry. > Already implemented. Great! > > Hmmm. Then why don't the manual at https://www.linux.org/docs/man8/tc-mir= red.html to reflect the changes? > That was the place I checked to see if ingress was still not implemented. > In the commit you point at, the sentence "Currently only egress is implem= ented" has been removed. This means that website is out-of-date, not sync'ed with latest man pages. > > > Question: > Is there any form of performance penalty if I send the mirrored traffic t= o the ingress queue of the destination interface rather than to the egress = queue? > I mean, in the kernel there is the possibility to perform far more action= s on the ingress queue than on the egress, but if I leave both queues at th= eir defaults, will mirrored packets to ingress use more CPU cycles than to = the egress destination, or are they more or less identical? > Hard to say without measurement. There is no queue on ingress side, by the way, so it could be faster than egress, regarding to lock contentions on queues. > > Question 2: > Given the commit https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/network/iproute2/iproute2= .git/commit/?id=3D5eca0a3701223619a513c7209f7d9335ca1b4cfa, how can I see i= n what kernel version it was added? > The kernel commit is: commit 53592b3640019f2834701093e38272fdfd367ad8 Author: Shmulik Ladkani Date: Thu Oct 13 09:06:44 2016 +0300 net/sched: act_mirred: Implement ingress actions which is merged in 4.10. Thanks.