From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=fpHc=QI=vger.kernel.org=netdev-owner@kernel.org>
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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 3C6AAC282D8
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri,  1 Feb 2019 13:23:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0440420869
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri,  1 Feb 2019 13:23:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1726967AbfBANXn (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 1 Feb 2019 08:23:43 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62770 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1726190AbfBANXn (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 1 Feb 2019 08:23:43 -0500
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22])
        (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
        (No client certificate requested)
        by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFE0C804EE;
        Fri,  1 Feb 2019 13:23:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-116-32.gru2.redhat.com [10.97.116.32])
        by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE9AA1001F3C;
        Fri,  1 Feb 2019 13:23:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000)
        id 27D16180C41; Fri,  1 Feb 2019 11:23:36 -0200 (-02)
Date:   Fri, 1 Feb 2019 11:23:36 -0200
From:   Marcelo Leitner <mleitner@redhat.com>
To:     Paul Blakey <paulb@mellanox.com>
Cc:     Guy Shattah <sguy@mellanox.com>, Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>,
        John Hurley <john.hurley@netronome.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>,
        Justin Pettit <jpettit@ovn.org>,
        Gregory Rose <gvrose8192@gmail.com>,
        Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@redhat.com>,
        Flavio Leitner <fbl@redhat.com>,
        Florian Westphal <fwestpha@redhat.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, Rashid Khan <rkhan@redhat.com>,
        Sushil Kulkarni <sukulkar@redhat.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andrew.gospodarek@broadcom.com>,
        Roi Dayan <roid@mellanox.com>,
        Yossi Kuperman <yossiku@mellanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@mellanox.com>,
        Rony Efraim <ronye@mellanox.com>,
        "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/6 v2] net/sched: Introduce act_ct
Message-ID: <20190201132335.GP10660@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1548748926-23822-2-git-send-email-paulb@mellanox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1548748926-23822-2-git-send-email-paulb@mellanox.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.27]); Fri, 01 Feb 2019 13:23:43 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:02:01AM +0200, Paul Blakey wrote:
...
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/tc_act/tc_ct.h b/include/uapi/linux/tc_act/tc_ct.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..6dbd771
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/tc_act/tc_ct.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note */
> +#ifndef __UAPI_TC_CT_H
> +#define __UAPI_TC_CT_H
> +
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/pkt_cls.h>
> +
> +#define TCA_ACT_CT 18
> +
> +struct tc_ct {
> +	tc_gen;
> +	__u16 zone;
> +	__u32 labels[4];
> +	__u32 labels_mask[4];
> +	__u32 mark;
> +	__u32 mark_mask;
> +	bool commit;

This is one of the points that our implementations differs. You used a
struct and wrapped it into TCA_CT_PARMS attribute, while I broke it up
into several attributes.

cls_flower and act_bpf, for example, doesn't use structs, but others
do.

Both have pros and cons and I imagine this topic probably was already
discussed but I'm not aware of a recommendation. Do we have one?

> +};
> +
> +enum {
> +	TCA_CT_UNSPEC,
> +	TCA_CT_PARMS,
> +	TCA_CT_TM,
> +	TCA_CT_PAD,
> +	__TCA_CT_MAX
> +};
> +#define TCA_CT_MAX (__TCA_CT_MAX - 1)
> +
> +#endif /* __UAPI_TC_CT_H */
...