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=-4.1 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 E094BC433DF for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 19:10:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAFB52084D for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 19:10:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Xaoc8TN2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728332AbgHETKW (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2020 15:10:22 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35516 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729153AbgHESfv (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:35:51 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x136.google.com (mail-il1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11512C06174A for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x136.google.com with SMTP id c6so3131637ilo.13 for ; Wed, 05 Aug 2020 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT) 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; bh=b++LoBh3fWjC+WaLkOK5I3Hi48SN1RsxpQ3n0PRz/HQ=; b=Xaoc8TN2ZmUlzCGCghnDLv4nNleHfXfNEaMQid39KOyg+3R8DRldq/PaVNPd7ajxIL mdwNozoIes10Oatdmb5F+1aeiR7sh20bw+2/vyr+nn409M1IuyCBTmvvZim1CHK/mDqp H00tATHpQooJryyIm6CSAARfOQ/LoVk7no2BYJ5khWT9qXB68PFPT52S9LqvgjsHXEr4 8pf0L0gYBY7mlZpuFjSeUdlj98SHH4R3mOfsjRPLhlhDwERiE56szJN+L60n/kSj20LR VkDmDyqnCKWGCtP3eC/uEsvwROZ3nBhEsg1DW9P6vSm3EGavhzTtkDqRTWwuDYXPyZkP KhgQ== 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; bh=b++LoBh3fWjC+WaLkOK5I3Hi48SN1RsxpQ3n0PRz/HQ=; b=TyFDFpbwGERIcAX42uev26bEzCzNdYGgY1TqnL/n6v50E29hSfhqrBOPLKAFbgszrk yYz9GsuYRxg2XBDifmrlsQknAnyIJ6z+wprQd3fY4DoWedRGDy11jYe8KPWBV58JZQWo p9gQuDuoipMfC+kJIjy4Qfs++RlOcqV05uNpzDfknP507Rm9PcBS8D7Zj9Lgwi3beunz g4RHKSRg2nAFKYeEv1dW+2eRw6LljV78e9Gmi+wn5oKe1NLWZUhVGXqK9f9VkK0r77Ip 29f8Aiw+CLWI5DBddo7dGMFdVj+/4ZYUpG/rfJtavq4hkyuehY0en4YTl1gZMa9orRSR KVJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ZCd2XY+uDYuyyP7msg30RnYCzg6WvpgM8NsfosLDWAYel7yKo j8FyQKOqjbYdy4ogV8VyGPe5KHcNOf1bAZNVXOc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz5JbXzDpXdhGsWVoO0N+kWCAdcueNKaO4a/WB9lerE8J61/vA5cndXbbMfyjiHJxWmcevFlhbh/ac++0YXCmU= X-Received: by 2002:a92:9f9a:: with SMTP id z26mr5107596ilk.277.1596652127314; Wed, 05 Aug 2020 11:28:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200805094553.69c2c91f@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> In-Reply-To: <20200805094553.69c2c91f@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> From: satish dhote Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 23:58:36 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Question about TC filter To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us, jhs@mojatatu.com, daniel@iogearbox.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Hi Jakub, Thanks for your response. Below are the OS and Kernel version I'm using. OS: Ubuntu 20.04.1 LTS Kernel Version: 5.4.0-42-generic Thanks Satish On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 10:15 PM Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 11:08:08 +0530 satish dhote wrote: > > Hi Team, > > > > I have a question regarding tc filter behavior. I tried to look > > for the answer over the web and netdev FAQ but didn't get the > > answer. Hence I'm looking for your help. > > > > I added ingress qdisc for interface enp0s25 and then configured the > > tc filter as shown below, but after adding filters I realize that > > rule is reflected as a result of both ingress and egress filter > > command? Is this the expected behaviour? or a bug? Why should the > > same filter be reflected in both ingress and egress path? > > > > I understand that policy is always configured for ingress traffic, > > so I believe that filters should not be reflected with egress. > > Behaviour is same when I offloaded ovs flow to the tc software > > datapath. > > I feel like this was discussed and perhaps fixed by: > > a7df4870d79b ("net_sched: fix tcm_parent in tc filter dump") > > What's your kernel version?