Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 03:19:04PM CET, ido...@mellanox.com wrote: >On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 07:00:50PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As I am adding support for cls_matchall in the b53/bcm_sf2 drivers, I >> was looking into several, yet unrelated things: >> >> - mlxsw does not seem to specify whether the port used for capture >> remains usable, or blocks non-mirror traffic ingressing/egressing it, do >> we want a control knob for that? If not, what is a sensible default, >> block all non capture traffic? > >Doesn't make sense to me to add such a default. It's up to the user. > >> - do we have an updated man page for tc-matchall.8 that features how to >> use the statistical sampler too? b53 switches have a divider that allows >> us to select how many frames we want to receive (10 bit value). > >https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/?id=5c5670fae43027778e84b9d9ff3b9d91a10a8131 > >Yotam (Cced) already commented that he intends to send iproute patches. > >> - b53 supports capture against a particular MAC SA or DA (or both), do >> we want to be able to control that somehow? > >Can't you just use flower (for example) instead of matchall in that >case?
Definitelly. No extensions to matchall, as otherwise it could not be called like that anylonger:) > >> What about Marvell switches, what can they do? > >No idea :) > >> - a fair amount of code dealing with the cls_matchall mirroring entry >> is not switch driver specific, in fact, the only things that are switch >> driver specific are: >> - list pointer where to store this entry (typically in the private >> network device context) >> - operation to check whether the device belongs to us (identical >> netdev_ops) >> - retrieval of the destination port number (to_port) which is also >> typically available in network device private context >> >> Do we want to move a fair amount of code into switchdev, treat >> cls_matchall entries as a specific switchdev object, and have drivers >> take over at the same level that mlxsw_sp_port_add_cls_matchall_mirror() >> currently starts? > >I prefer the current way in which we re-use as many as possible core >APIs without adding switchdev-specific code. I don't have a concrete >argument against your proposal, though. This (tc-offload) is completely unrelated to switchdev. So it would make no sense.
