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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,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 1B0D1C10DCE for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:53:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B6A21D56 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=Mellanox.com header.i=@Mellanox.com header.b="liQp1f8c" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727733AbgCJXxg (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:53:36 -0400 Received: from mail-eopbgr80042.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.8.42]:63319 "EHLO EUR04-VI1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727591AbgCJXxg (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:53:36 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=kN+oTW1Z229f3Y0Uis0+1C8PaMgrreZXyqTg37mDKjKUYrtNQjTX0AuprUEy0a2nMz8sizABhUADLCtd3jbecsf4PxdrnRJhK9WpIuqlzQ7g35T+wQ2GU8GVuI8p2N7s6U2cG0uLNJ7LMCzyMqiz88+2415OzVCsJVPZ+Ju2gNpAQlpelYicMLdl2NYr1+obmRNq3qoGSw5gZlcPyBUaWgnIHKnNhsy/OSeRM2Vg/z3PILiIiC5JUTV9iN4Ldh0DB5Y6GehXsTv3iFj9hv51IWEtlx1Y3iIFSbUnx5r1gqB2jHiqxRueUdADYIbFHZN9FFeIUsU76Kkq4ttEWgFNdg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=oWi5Gh8gsjbrRPqjTiBUwBP8jBI6IsVAYAuaBSooPtY=; b=IackcMiXsCvGBtz7TZJ13DeHSg7Amrope8fiT7Ga9aAh4gR7i9voKeAQr64wGjAbFi9kPhT53S2FX5SQNKgFF7fmed+lVxOCe0OH4WJZda+ZWQfW7Fh1qkYpEy+YOJ1BEdgtvlij70aMiDsCodCyC67u5EtFCcM8XwSX8LqaVNi2UI8FaVS9u+Je1+UiPYYX1PhX++TPMTuXJr3hlAbC4256Yp6rPHgXSx+hZgXJgw+0HP5hq7cUImKJ0Aa93/NkXBC4BRAlMagS9p/oNmJS6KLGx4uz+Y3mmQ4qKtWvL0Pz2eJV05fF9+BL5mQzD9+grlyYkUYymFsabCJ2VV/hEg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mellanox.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=mellanox.com; dkim=pass header.d=mellanox.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Mellanox.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=oWi5Gh8gsjbrRPqjTiBUwBP8jBI6IsVAYAuaBSooPtY=; b=liQp1f8cpYUUAoNQs4JANUrUlPEZeR/9qR5Nxz79Uc9f57NyAJW+on+UG5mGY+5fZ92UgzVR920rhM7F+LdM+3UuQgIzcGngZoy1OlASwUk2ChSNEHPuGpYd7T4+SMFS1vsG9Kds3Hg2Z3MQslcK9kW1J7n5v7GpIIsH9Dr8Jbk= Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=petrm@mellanox.com; Received: from HE1PR05MB4746.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.176.168.150) by HE1PR05MB4587.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (20.176.166.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.15; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:53:33 +0000 Received: from HE1PR05MB4746.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c146:9acd:f4dc:4e32]) by HE1PR05MB4746.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c146:9acd:f4dc:4e32%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2793.013; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:53:33 +0000 References: <20200309183503.173802-1-idosch@idosch.org> <20200309183503.173802-3-idosch@idosch.org> <20200309151818.4350fae6@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> <87sgigy1zr.fsf@mellanox.com> <20200310125321.699b36bc@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> <87mu8nyhlw.fsf@mellanox.com> <20200310160052.72e7e09b@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> User-agent: mu4e 1.3.3; emacs 26.3 From: Petr Machata To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Ido Schimmel , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, jiri@mellanox.com, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, mlxsw@mellanox.com, Ido Schimmel Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/6] net: sched: Add centralized RED flag checking In-reply-to: <20200310160052.72e7e09b@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:53:29 +0100 Message-ID: <87lfo7ydfq.fsf@mellanox.com> Content-Type: text/plain X-ClientProxiedBy: ZR0P278CA0026.CHEP278.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:910:1c::13) To HE1PR05MB4746.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:a3::22) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from yaviefel (89.176.246.183) by ZR0P278CA0026.CHEP278.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:910:1c::13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2793.15 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:53:32 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [89.176.246.183] X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-HT: Tenant X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: aa566bca-702e-4cdf-aecf-08d7c54e3d8e X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: HE1PR05MB4587:|HE1PR05MB4587: X-MS-Exchange-Transport-Forked: True X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:7691; X-Forefront-PRVS: 033857D0BD X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(376002)(346002)(396003)(136003)(39860400002)(366004)(189003)(199004)(186003)(36756003)(6496006)(6916009)(478600001)(107886003)(8936002)(66556008)(2616005)(66476007)(5660300002)(66946007)(26005)(4326008)(316002)(956004)(86362001)(6486002)(81156014)(2906002)(81166006)(8676002)(16526019)(54906003)(6666004)(52116002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:HE1PR05MB4587;H:HE1PR05MB4746.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;LANG:en;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: mellanox.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: XNClAwy7o3pIwtrd6H2K+hoNuvOUJHyEoUA5ogICQNubXhIDM4J0vM3qJ5/jXvBOScyhUL/IhptVZ0PJQfPfCCGIKiIlr6MWlaskAdlHnJEMIP57Y+mpSWW27oLSHKlaSBW4+ygyeLEwO8q60HexpQwcjjw5nDcgo+RN/2dR1LedETOcSId4hIjainTlpwVDLL5hl+jaMAXHcl+lUt5WBniSg/Fyj+rqSaZssd+jQbpUtW2omMTWwAPWAUGG0W3kWewdywvVicRoFEO01OQ/Q78QL5lRShnFq6q7ETuJ9105gn/DIr4hOk6Rwf35d74Qlxh7tqih1yqR3l4BlD4m9M3Qxp4XX4kg0JddT5FUVxm7z+UW5VFgmzxBwkKmTxeUtS7HgMy/y8xAF8x99pBcFwPDptOm+j32CFrWRr/Vh17IRio2T0mPxpCZsNbogVlG X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: V4uIYmy8xZGub6yBv9qxvi/dxWaHt5v/TvCEKVxns3gnLpGtfNvb17AzjSAPnEAxFN6sjNvOZAOuBJXlD5ttbd84O77pBcG9fbdD6Zmsp/+UXWGxuG2DLBq2eMz6yXt704UxJqmVYdaHLNA2uaF6zA== X-OriginatorOrg: Mellanox.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: aa566bca-702e-4cdf-aecf-08d7c54e3d8e X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Mar 2020 23:53:32.9335 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: a652971c-7d2e-4d9b-a6a4-d149256f461b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: IjGsWYmd6xqFodBYmiS119PgDJ+3TShWH3m+tlypDmaS47Df2juaVgQTuJB+X/jBNf9mtMY0ke5dz2r5qy0pIg== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR05MB4587 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:23:23 +0100 Petr Machata wrote: >> Jakub Kicinski writes: >> >> > On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:48:24 +0100 Petr Machata wrote: >> >> > The only flags which are validated today are the gRED per-vq ones, which >> >> > are a recent addition and were validated from day one. >> >> >> >> Do you consider the validation as such to be a problem? Because that >> >> would mean that the qdiscs that have not validated flags this way >> >> basically cannot be extended ever ("a buggy userspace used to get a >> >> quiet slicing of flags, and now they mean something"). >> > >> > I just remember leaving it as is when I was working on GRED, because >> > of the potential breakage. The uAPI policy is what it is, then again >> > we probably lose more by making the code of these ancient Qdiscs ugly >> > than we win :( >> > >> > I don't feel like I can ack it with clear conscience tho. >> >> Just to make sure -- are you opposed to adding a new flag, or to >> validation? > > They are both uABI changes, so both. > >> At least the adaptative flag was added years after the >> others in 2011. I wasn't paying much attention to kernel back then, but >> I think the ABI rules are older than that. > > Yes, but some (e.g. TC subsystem) didn't really care much about those > rules until more recently. > > The alternative to validation/adding flag in place is obviously to add > a new netlink attribute which would be validated from the start. Can you > give it a try and see how ugly it gets? Yeah, I'll give it a stab tomorrow.