From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next,v2 05/12] cls_flower: add statistics retrieval
 infrastructure and use it
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 16:04:16 +0100
Message-ID: <20181119150416.GL2223@nanopsycho.orion>
References: <20181119001519.12124-1-pablo@netfilter.org>
 <20181119001519.12124-6-pablo@netfilter.org>
 <20181119135705.GG2223@nanopsycho.orion>
 <20181119144850.wfl22tlcvdlkddl4@salvia>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
        thomas.lendacky@amd.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
        ariel.elior@cavium.com, michael.chan@broadcom.com,
        santosh@chelsio.com, madalin.bucur@nxp.com,
        yisen.zhuang@huawei.com, salil.mehta@huawei.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, tariqt@mellanox.com,
        saeedm@mellanox.com, jiri@mellanox.com, idosch@mellanox.com,
        jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com,
        grygorii.strashko@ti.com, andrew@lunn.ch,
        vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com,
        joabreu@synopsys.com, linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com,
        ganeshgr@chelsio.com, ogerlitz@mellanox.com
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com ([209.85.221.68]:37964 "EHLO
        mail-wr1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1729474AbeKTBet (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 20:34:49 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id e3-v6so32471462wrs.5
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 07:10:56 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181119144850.wfl22tlcvdlkddl4@salvia>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 03:48:50PM CET, pablo@netfilter.org wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 02:57:05PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 01:15:12AM CET, pablo@netfilter.org wrote:
>[...]
>> >diff --git a/include/net/pkt_cls.h b/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>> >index 7d7aefa5fcd2..7f9a8d5ca945 100644
>> >--- a/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>> >+++ b/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>> >@@ -758,6 +758,12 @@ enum tc_fl_command {
>> > 	TC_CLSFLOWER_TMPLT_DESTROY,
>> > };
>> > 
>> >+struct tc_cls_flower_stats {
>> >+	u64	pkts;
>> >+	u64	bytes;
>> >+	u64	lastused;
>> >+};
>> >+
>> > struct tc_cls_flower_offload {
>> > 	struct tc_cls_common_offload common;
>> > 	enum tc_fl_command command;
>> >@@ -765,6 +771,7 @@ struct tc_cls_flower_offload {
>> > 	struct flow_rule rule;
>> > 	struct tcf_exts *exts;
>> > 	u32 classid;
>> >+	struct tc_cls_flower_stats stats;
>> > };
>> > 
>> > static inline struct flow_rule *
>> >@@ -773,6 +780,14 @@ tc_cls_flower_offload_flow_rule(struct tc_cls_flower_offload *tc_flow_cmd)
>> > 	return &tc_flow_cmd->rule;
>> > }
>> > 
>> >+static inline void tc_cls_flower_stats_update(struct tc_cls_flower_offload *cls_flower,
>> >+					      u64 pkts, u64 bytes, u64 lastused)
>> >+{
>> >+	cls_flower->stats.pkts		= pkts;
>> >+	cls_flower->stats.bytes		= bytes;
>> >+	cls_flower->stats.lastused	= lastused;
>> 
>> Why do you need to store the values here in struct tc_cls_flower_offload?
>> Why don't you just call tcf_exts_stats_update()? Basically,
>> tc_cls_flower_stats_update() should be just wrapper around
>> tcf_exts_stats_update() so that drivers wouldn't use ->exts directly, as
>> you will remove them in follow-up patches, no?
>
>Patch 07/12 stops exposing tc action exts to drivers, so we need a
>structure (struct tc_cls_flower_stats) to convey this statistics back
>to the cls_flower frontend.

Hmm, shouldn't these stats be rather flow_rule related than flower
related?