From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 1A409C433DB for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 11:28:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D171B64E7B for ; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 11:28:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231419AbhBBL2M (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 06:28:12 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44816 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231194AbhBBL1Y (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2021 06:27:24 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D1BEC061573; Tue, 2 Feb 2021 03:26:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id 8so6962549plc.10; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 03:26:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YQTLhZR3hDf/41Do9Wuvt9T1ewGnoc9cSUmCkbXo2v4=; b=QMbZAzTLylWpjRpuDOf7MOcTUsDSZ4g61Vu+tL8Vlb+zyCPrEPOw3Lr5G7vPtsZC06 WGQC4t+KMz6odoGASegp3HmEMasvbRYGu0e1vsJixEIrDR93B6yqL3mTV6B35T+bxI96 /230yhbqa5y5Y0XSLMcFU6oWnbRmgaSIbEZv+UWdkVbOILGXpwiYyIVhEamToGW4ZM+D rpecn+hjffYEB8pxDtd4MwWXH3VSpI5iIM498LV2lyHF5yN9a4ayg4lSwDwVZ4ayscFz x71JscBMiC6gZJpb1MCuDBDUbkQmyBgrk+AI0CBss/SnSJLR9QZCTUmJIp3IhkJtulhC +/0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YQTLhZR3hDf/41Do9Wuvt9T1ewGnoc9cSUmCkbXo2v4=; b=kamWir1PqDzFg0oPiYt/HYO9LqGqNToMCnO8GgBi+Yilx+pqWdBOX8exjYElhNvism 8PlL3DjyTbkKjZBxiY1xOds9Zsa/JE+tGZZhEXVUgjRkqJpLIix9fVzmwxL2gQ9s2xge mMD6vV0HHGmtUprb31PXiZ2d5qVjLCGyxfHzJAjmDetkSADQ/j6g8fX5SbCTY/x4Hmux BH6BMhBD26ddXmfVfZLn1t6QJ5PUY8I7f2gP+Sptjp1Db0fE20abCjPi+ECQcbsLlNYY Icec2Bu2REQ+0Q9NHkiMqZ/0Uzf4T6k6PmIMb1IMqzNYhS8om7GsT72vxuzYhiM1BMRR Uenw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531d5qinC4MjdvpTSpah/kRSv3BYwCeI1MzWMNlEK9EvIeDkad0o p/cAeB4myUqr3FFZeVz0iNSL5lSYvBiQCoabjYACt3294smsvw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwakZ1GnIoxdbhWs9AnFYxkfFUhHiGw0yRpMlAGmAPk6odqH0k51T9mGKOI0yhL1mZsfDwMb4mCvPVYIt/KU6g= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7b89:b029:e1:1b46:bcec with SMTP id w9-20020a1709027b89b02900e11b46bcecmr21704504pll.5.1612265203527; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 03:26:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201204102901.109709-1-marekx.majtyka@intel.com> <20201204102901.109709-2-marekx.majtyka@intel.com> <878sad933c.fsf@toke.dk> <20201204124618.GA23696@ranger.igk.intel.com> <048bd986-2e05-ee5b-2c03-cd8c473f6636@iogearbox.net> <20201207135433.41172202@carbon> <5fce960682c41_5a96208e4@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> <20201207230755.GB27205@ranger.igk.intel.com> <5fd068c75b92d_50ce20814@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> <20201209095454.GA36812@ranger.igk.intel.com> <20201209125223.49096d50@carbon> <1e5e044c8382a68a8a547a1892b48fb21d53dbb9.camel@kernel.org> <6f8c23d4ac60525830399754b4891c12943b63ac.camel@kernel.org> <87h7mvsr0e.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <87h7mvsr0e.fsf@toke.dk> From: Marek Majtyka Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 12:26:32 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf 1/5] net: ethtool: add xdp properties flag set To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Cc: Saeed Mahameed , David Ahern , Maciej Fijalkowski , John Fastabend , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Daniel Borkmann , Maciej Fijalkowski , =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= , Andrii Nakryiko , Jonathan Lemon , Alexei Starovoitov , Network Development , "David S. Miller" , hawk@kernel.org, bpf , intel-wired-lan , Jakub Kicinski , "Karlsson, Magnus" , jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org Thanks Toke, In fact, I was waiting for a single confirmation, disagreement or comment. I have it now. As there are no more comments, I am getting down to work right away. Marek On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 5:16 PM Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: > > Marek Majtyka writes: > > > I would like to thank you for your time, comments, nitpicking as well > > as encouraging. > > > > One thing needs clarification I think, that is, that those flags > > describe driver static feature sets - which are read-only. They have > > nothing in common with driver runtime configuration change yet. > > Runtime change of this state can be added but it needs a new variable > > and it can be done later on if someone needs it. > > > > Obviously, it is not possible to make everybody happy, especially with > > XDP_BASE flags set. To be honest, this XDP_BASE definition is a > > syntactic sugar for me and I can live without it. We can either remove > > it completely, from > > which IMO we all and other developers will suffer later on, or maybe > > we can agree on these two helper set of flags: XDP_BASE (TX, ABORTED, > > PASS, DROP) and XDP_LIMITED_BASE(ABORTED,PASS_DROP). > > What do you think? > > > > I am also going to add a new XDP_REDIRECT_TARGET flag and retrieving > > XDP flags over rtnelink interface. > > > > I also think that for completeness, ethtool implementation should be > > kept together with rtnelink part in order to cover both ip and > > ethtool tools. Do I have your approval or disagreement? Please let me > > know. > > Hi Marek > > I just realised that it seems no one actually replied to your email. On > my part at least that was because I didn't have any objections, so I'm > hoping you didn't feel the lack of response was discouraging (and that > you're still working on a revision of this series)? :) > > -Toke > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Majtyka Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 12:26:32 +0100 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 bpf 1/5] net: ethtool: add xdp properties flag set In-Reply-To: <87h7mvsr0e.fsf@toke.dk> References: <20201204102901.109709-1-marekx.majtyka@intel.com> <20201204102901.109709-2-marekx.majtyka@intel.com> <878sad933c.fsf@toke.dk> <20201204124618.GA23696@ranger.igk.intel.com> <048bd986-2e05-ee5b-2c03-cd8c473f6636@iogearbox.net> <20201207135433.41172202@carbon> <5fce960682c41_5a96208e4@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> <20201207230755.GB27205@ranger.igk.intel.com> <5fd068c75b92d_50ce20814@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> <20201209095454.GA36812@ranger.igk.intel.com> <20201209125223.49096d50@carbon> <1e5e044c8382a68a8a547a1892b48fb21d53dbb9.camel@kernel.org> <6f8c23d4ac60525830399754b4891c12943b63ac.camel@kernel.org> <87h7mvsr0e.fsf@toke.dk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: Thanks Toke, In fact, I was waiting for a single confirmation, disagreement or comment. I have it now. As there are no more comments, I am getting down to work right away. Marek On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 5:16 PM Toke H?iland-J?rgensen wrote: > > Marek Majtyka writes: > > > I would like to thank you for your time, comments, nitpicking as well > > as encouraging. > > > > One thing needs clarification I think, that is, that those flags > > describe driver static feature sets - which are read-only. They have > > nothing in common with driver runtime configuration change yet. > > Runtime change of this state can be added but it needs a new variable > > and it can be done later on if someone needs it. > > > > Obviously, it is not possible to make everybody happy, especially with > > XDP_BASE flags set. To be honest, this XDP_BASE definition is a > > syntactic sugar for me and I can live without it. We can either remove > > it completely, from > > which IMO we all and other developers will suffer later on, or maybe > > we can agree on these two helper set of flags: XDP_BASE (TX, ABORTED, > > PASS, DROP) and XDP_LIMITED_BASE(ABORTED,PASS_DROP). > > What do you think? > > > > I am also going to add a new XDP_REDIRECT_TARGET flag and retrieving > > XDP flags over rtnelink interface. > > > > I also think that for completeness, ethtool implementation should be > > kept together with rtnelink part in order to cover both ip and > > ethtool tools. Do I have your approval or disagreement? Please let me > > know. > > Hi Marek > > I just realised that it seems no one actually replied to your email. On > my part at least that was because I didn't have any objections, so I'm > hoping you didn't feel the lack of response was discouraging (and that > you're still working on a revision of this series)? :) > > -Toke >