On February 23, 2018 5:20:35 PM PST, Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.go...@intel.com> wrote: >This allows filters added by tc-flower and specifying MAC addresses, >Ethernet types, and the VLAN priority field, to be offloaded to the >controller. > >This reuses most of the infrastructure used by ethtool, ethtool can be >used to read these filters, but modification and deletion can only be >done via tc-flower.
You would want to check what other drivers supporting both ethtool::rxnfc and cls_flower do, but this can be seriously confusing to an user. As an user I would be more comfortable with seeing only rules added through ethtool via ethtool and those added by cls_flower via cls_flower. They will both access a shared set of resources but it seems easier for me to dump rules with both tools to figure out why -ENOSPC was returned rather than seeing something I did not add. Others might see it entirely differently. If you added the ability for cls_flower to indicate a queue number and either a fixed rule index or auto-placement (RX_CLS_LOC_ANY), could that eliminate entirely the need for adding MAC address steering in earlier patches? -- Florian
