From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [patch net-next v4 00/10] net: sched: allow qdiscs to share filter block instances Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 10:42:43 -0500 Message-ID: <8213e2c4-d715-cbca-5933-fc8ac11df764@mojatatu.com> References: <20180103094025.GA2067@nanopsycho.orion> <20180103172209.GD2067@nanopsycho.orion> <20180103155152.7e94a295@cakuba.netronome.com> <20180104065702.GH2067@nanopsycho.orion> <20180103230658.595eac7d@cakuba.netronome.com> <20180104101257.GA2213@nanopsycho> <5163c8db-8b2c-0746-b148-28a7e0fec2c4@mojatatu.com> <20180104130506.GD2213@nanopsycho> <20180104140653.GF2213@nanopsycho> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jakub Kicinski , David Ahern , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, 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: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mail-it0-f48.google.com ([209.85.214.48]:46509 "EHLO mail-it0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753120AbeADPmv (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jan 2018 10:42:51 -0500 Received: by mail-it0-f48.google.com with SMTP id c16so2725399itc.5 for ; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 07:42:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180104140653.GF2213@nanopsycho> Content-Language: en-GB Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 18-01-04 09:06 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 02:43:08PM CET, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote: >> If i understood you correctly, that is still iffy. >> An admin will see packets for the same filter on one device going >> to an agreed-to queue but on another going to a default queue. > > Yeah, it is. That needs a bit more thoughts and discussion. That was the > main purpose I did not address it in this patchset and allowed only > ingress and clsact qidsc. > Like i said - this requires the admin to be aware of this issue. It is nasty otherwise. >> One option is to name all egress queues the same way on all devices >> f.e in the two examples i provided call root qdiscs 1:0. >> >> I am not sure how cleanly you get this to work with egress >> My current thinking involves some brain somersault... >> I will think some more about it... > > clsact egress works the same as ingress qdisc - please check the code. > clsact egress does not deal with tcf_result - what code do you want me to check? cheers, jamal