From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v4 00/10] net: sched: allow qdiscs to share
 filter block instances
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 07:57:02 +0100
Message-ID: <20180104065702.GH2067@nanopsycho.orion>
References: <ad7dbefc-515a-2cdd-a55f-86e0d8cc587b@gmail.com>
 <20171224071956.GA1883@nanopsycho>
 <780a80d0-9384-ae34-4cab-3070b004b64e@gmail.com>
 <20171225102346.GB1885@nanopsycho>
 <20180102194944.GG2051@nanopsycho.orion>
 <e34c7581-b5a0-58c4-dde0-cf50497417f8@gmail.com>
 <20180103094025.GA2067@nanopsycho.orion>
 <d6cff5a4-b240-2a19-2af0-8b60de9f5435@gmail.com>
 <20180103172209.GD2067@nanopsycho.orion>
 <20180103155152.7e94a295@cakuba.netronome.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        davem@davemloft.net, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com,
        mlxsw@mellanox.com, andrew@lunn.ch,
        vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
        michael.chan@broadcom.com, ganeshgr@chelsio.com,
        saeedm@mellanox.com, matanb@mellanox.com, leonro@mellanox.com,
        idosch@mellanox.com, simon.horman@netronome.com,
        pieter.jansenvanvuuren@netronome.com, john.hurley@netronome.com,
        alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, ogerlitz@mellanox.com,
        john.fastabend@gmail.com, daniel@iogearbox.net
To: Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@wp.pl>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:33128 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750770AbeADG5E (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 4 Jan 2018 01:57:04 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id g130so837828wme.0
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 03 Jan 2018 22:57:03 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180103155152.7e94a295@cakuba.netronome.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 12:51:52AM CET, kubakici@wp.pl wrote:
>On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 18:22:09 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> However I don't agree about breaking the existing filter add and show
>> and also imposibility to make not-shared block shared in the runtime
>> before defining it first.
>
>FWIW I would agree with David that allowing add on a shared block
>modify filters on another interface can break existing users.  (No
>opinion on dump and lifetime).

I don't think that David is saying that, but why do you think it would
break existing users?