On 17-01-08 09:19 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 11:21:41PM CET, j...@mojatatu.com wrote: >> On 17-01-02 01:23 PM, John Fastabend wrote: >> >>> >>> Additionally I would like to point out this is an arbitrary length binary >>> blob (for undefined use, without even a specified encoding) that gets pushed >>> between user space and hardware ;) This seemed to get folks fairly excited >>> in >>> the past. >>> >> >> The binary blob size is a little strange - but i think there is value >> in storing some "cookie" field. The challenge is whether the kernel >> gets to intepret it; in which case encoding must be specified. Or >> whether we should leave it up to user space - in which something >> like tc could standardize its own encodings. > > This should never be interpreted by kernel. I think this would be good > to make clear in the comment in the code. >
Ah OK I had assumed you would be pushing this via tc_cls_flower_offload into the driver in a follow up patch. But if it lives in kernel space as opaque cookie guess its no different then other id fields order/prio/cookie. Thanks for clarifying.
