From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [patch net-next] tc: add BPF based action Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 08:26:00 +0100 Message-ID: <20150108072600.GC1860@nanopsycho.orion> References: <1420649035-9522-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <54AD7C03.3010904@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, jhs@mojatatu.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, ast@plumgrid.com To: Daniel Borkmann Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:49770 "EHLO mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751298AbbAHH0D (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 02:26:03 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id h11so1368997wiw.1 for ; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 23:26:01 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54AD7C03.3010904@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 07:33:39PM CET, dborkman@redhat.com wrote: >On 01/07/2015 05:43 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>This action provides a possibility to exec custom BPF code. > >Can you elaborate a bit more on the particular use-case, and >what scenarios are unsolveable with the BPF filter we already >have in tc? Just wondering, since you're using BPF for the >purpose of classifying (but just from the context of actions) >what about a possibility of a generic container for reusing >(any) classifier from the framework, so we would not need to >duplicate code? > >On the other hand, I would understand if it's at some point in >time eBPF which would f.e. mangle the packet, but the API you >propose is clearly classic BPF. ;) Exactly. I would like to extend cls_bpf and act_bpf to handle eBPF right after. That is the point. > >Thanks, >Daniel