On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 08:37:58AM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 11:41:12AM +0000, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > I see nothing wrong if this is exposed/made visible in the usual way
> > > through
> > > ethtool -k as well. I guess at least that would be the expected way to
> > > query
> > > for such driver capabilities.
> >
> > +1 on exposing this to user space. Whether via ethtool -k or a
> > separate XDP-specific netlink message is mostly a question of whether
> > we expect the need to expose more complex capabilities than bits.
>
> I'm very much against using NETIF_F_ flags and exposing this to user space.
> I see this xdp feature flag as temporary workaround until all drivers
> support adjust_head() helper. It is very much a fundamental feature for xdp.
> Without being able to add/remove headers the usability of xdp becomes very
> limited.
>
> If you guys dont like extra ndo_xdp command, I'd suggest to do
> "if (prog->xdp_adjust_head)" check in the driver and if driver doesn't
> support it yet, just fail XDP_SETUP_PROG command.
> imo that will be more flexible interface, since in the future drivers
> can fail on different combination of features and simple boolean flag
> unlikely to serve us for long time.
It makes sense that adjust_head() will eventually be supported by
all xdp-capable driver. If that is the case, lets check
prog->xdp_adjust_head inside the driver instead of adding
another ndo_xdp command which will become unuseful very soon.
