Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 01:44:09AM CET, jakub.kicin...@netronome.com wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:50:36 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> @@ -159,17 +162,38 @@ static int cls_bpf_offload_cmd(struct tcf_proto *tp,
>> struct cls_bpf_prog *prog,
>> cls_bpf.exts_integrated = prog->exts_integrated;
>> cls_bpf.gen_flags = prog->gen_flags;
>>
>> - err = dev->netdev_ops->ndo_setup_tc(dev, TC_SETUP_CLSBPF, &cls_bpf);
>> - if (!err && (cmd == TC_CLSBPF_ADD || cmd == TC_CLSBPF_REPLACE))
>> - prog->gen_flags |= TCA_CLS_FLAGS_IN_HW;
>> + if (tc_can_offload(dev)) {
>> + err = dev->netdev_ops->ndo_setup_tc(dev, TC_SETUP_CLSBPF,
>> + &cls_bpf);
>> + if (addorrep) {
>> + if (err) {
>> + if (skip_sw)
>> + return err;
>> + } else {
>> + prog->gen_flags |= TCA_CLS_FLAGS_IN_HW;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + err = tc_setup_cb_call(block, NULL, TC_SETUP_CLSBPF, &cls_bpf, skip_sw);
>> + if (addorrep) {
>> + if (err < 0) {
>> + cls_bpf_offload_cmd(tp, prog, TC_CLSBPF_DESTROY);
>
>It seems counter intuitive that the appropriate action for a failed
>REPLACE is DESTROY. One would expect a bad REPLACE X -> Y to be
>followed by a REPLACE Y -> X (i.e. go back to X).
That makes sense.
>
>At least my reading of cls_bpf is that if replace fails software path
>will keep using the old prog. Is this maybe something that's different
>in flower? Or am I reading the code wrong?
In flower, there is not possible to do replace. First, the new one is
added and then the old one is removed.
