> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org> On Behalf Of
> Michal Swiatkowski
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2024 12:33 PM
> To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
> Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; Szycik, Marcin <marcin.szy...@intel.com>;
> Kitszel, Przemyslaw <przemyslaw.kits...@intel.com>
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [iwl-next v1] ice: add recipe priority check in
> search
>
> The new recipe should be added even if exactly the same recipe already
> exists with different priority.
>
> Example use case is when the rule is being added from TC tool context.
> It should has the highest priority, but if the recipe already exists the rule
> will
> inherit it priority. It can lead to the situation when the rule added from TC
> tool has lower priority than expected.
>
> The solution is to check the recipe priority when trying to find existing one.
>
> Previous recipe is still useful. Example:
> RID 8 -> priority 4
> RID 10 -> priority 7
>
> The difference is only in priority rest is let's say eth + mac + direction.
>
> Adding ARP + MAC_A + RX on RID 8, forward to VF0_VSI After that IP +
> MAC_B + RX on RID 10 (from TC tool), forward to PF0
>
> Both will work.
>
> In case of adding ARP + MAC_A + RX on RID 8, forward to VF0_VSI ARP +
> MAC_A + RX on RID 10, forward to PF0.
>
> Only second one will match, but this is expected.
>
> Reviewed-by: Marcin Szycik <marcin.szy...@linux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kits...@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkow...@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_switch.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
Tested-by: Sujai Buvaneswaran <sujai.buvaneswa...@intel.com>
