On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:57 PM Eli Cohen <e...@mellanox.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:13:06AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 10:19 AM Eli Cohen <e...@mellanox.com> wrote: > > > > so what are we protecting here against? someone removing the device > > while the tc rule is being added? > > > Not necessairly. In case of ecmp, the rule may be copied to another > eswitch. At this time, if the mirred device does not exsist anymore, we > will crash. > > I saw this problem at a customer's machine and this solved the problem. > It was an older kernel but I think we have the same issue here as well. > All you have is the ifindex of the mirred device so what I did here is > required.
Repeating myself, why do it in the driver and not higher in the tc stack? if I got you correctly, the same problem can happen for sw only (skip-hw) rules
