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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C36C1C433EF for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:16:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F55B604DA for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:16:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231386AbhKCOSl (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Nov 2021 10:18:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55192 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231131AbhKCOSl (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Nov 2021 10:18:41 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87D82C061714 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com with SMTP id i13so3060188qvm.1 for ; Wed, 03 Nov 2021 07:16:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mojatatu-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=96NMyOf7Xc+DLK0TeMLRjGLyxB8JUgSNfA9KpevCXFM=; b=2esqIm8LdDCm0oXUovnNfFFULcE1T5xrMfP5djibtkrUmV7LTc1epBfHTXJengLlw4 O11150f+huMAMKpIddon7EEoOB9YdOdm392B9T22/zkbqN09fur4pYCCJsF217gTm3fI 0e13IT3+pSHtTmelCQs2tNMYKe7eMEP15Y2wlGDeVM2BBbdQTJnrMGmVpAQ8kOIXcd2u 6e3ZF31E7aZ2ZjPh+cRN4FBXnRXvHrIOXfwRmDOsZz6Ttfas9IlF7w+AnArJa79MCpSf X1GSB6htRaSL5K8sXj4Z9UBdwx8R8WwT/ubFB8iB0O0vmPEhs8aMpYQtsXqcR3SyKqs0 Ax2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=96NMyOf7Xc+DLK0TeMLRjGLyxB8JUgSNfA9KpevCXFM=; b=3uLlgvNkUrgWf99hVx563fG3/zbk0OmXiHz+sdWtMs2EGoeiH9hsY0e5yK0YdNZ3eW GkZbG8Mj52A7qE3Bi/TkK53YeSS26TZnbZ/bDNKla9QJ0EExwmuDACy+eU3Xd4S2qX4m wo3Acd8W3t8R3wMHt2crILzH1Hvik4zLZVVx9SoP74DYHfUatoMungJffUt4OaBIOMj3 LWBE6bjnF2flRh+oILd08GxYjBNlITkF3u33Sf0ji/4x/lehQeAj7Jh7iYXbBtSTcJu0 x0Mq9JJ7F1OJ7X49SK9ipOAyrCfJRoZtTQQyHLuolILthKrePBH5mcpJ3YBx8So7PWlY 3uWA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530f0GLa7qMecWzIVPdCj8tAKFTVNCTKjZtr1PJFqdBYhe5w4D83 bNn+TXujl/fD+ZXEM94KLxMxcQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyn9Mry059NLfcxfyEQpunCO67H6HDqogAM1i5w3rNfHtpHskMH1Hzv1qEmCYuVG/fxUK5f8Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:ccc:: with SMTP id 12mr7128051qvx.8.1635948963768; Wed, 03 Nov 2021 07:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.173] (bras-base-kntaon1617w-grc-33-142-112-185-132.dsl.bell.ca. [142.112.185.132]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id p16sm1059009qtx.92.2021.11.03.07.16.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 03 Nov 2021 07:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 10:16:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.1 Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH net-next v3 8/8] flow_offload: validate flags of filter and actions Content-Language: en-US To: Baowen Zheng , Simon Horman , Vlad Buslov Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Roi Dayan , Ido Schimmel , Cong Wang , Jiri Pirko , Baowen Zheng , Louis Peens , oss-drivers , Oz Shlomo References: <20211028110646.13791-1-simon.horman@corigine.com> <20211028110646.13791-9-simon.horman@corigine.com> <7147daf1-2546-a6b5-a1ba-78dfb4af408a@mojatatu.com> <20211102123957.GA7266@corigine.com> <428057ce-ccbc-3878-71aa-d5926f11248c@mojatatu.com> <66f350c5-1fd7-6132-3791-390454c97256@mojatatu.com> <10dae364-b649-92f8-11b0-f3628a6f550a@mojatatu.com> From: Jamal Hadi Salim In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 2021-11-03 10:03, Baowen Zheng wrote: > Thanks for your reply. > On November 3, 2021 9:34 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On 2021-11-03 08:33, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>> On 2021-11-03 07:30, Baowen Zheng wrote: >>>> On November 3, 2021 6:14 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: [..] > Sorry for more clarification about another case that Vlad mentioned: > #add a policer action with skip_hw > tc actions add action police skip_hw rate ... index 20 > #Now add a filter5 which has no flag > tc filter add dev $DEV1 proto ip parent ffff: flower \ > ip_proto icmp action police index 20 > I think the filter5 could be legal, since it will not run in hardware. > Driver will check failed when try to offload this filter. So the filter5 will only run in software. > WDYT? > I think this one also has ambiguity. If the filter doesnt specify skip_sw or skip_hw it will run both in s/w and h/w. I am worried if that looks suprising to someone debugging after because in h/w there is filter 5 but no policer but in s/w twin we have filter 5 and policer index 20. It could be design intent, but in my opinion we have priorities to resolve such ambiguities in policies. If we use the rule which says the flags have to match exactly then we can simplify resolving any ambiguity - which will make it illegal, no? cheers, jamal