Björn Töpel <bjorn.to...@intel.com> writes:
> On 2021-01-20 13:50, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.to...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>> index c001766adcbc..bbc7d9a57262 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>> @@ -3836,6 +3836,12 @@ union bpf_attr {
>>> * Return
>>> * A pointer to a struct socket on success or NULL if the
>>> file is
>>> * not a socket.
>>> + *
>>> + * long bpf_redirect_xsk(struct xdp_buff *xdp_md, u64 action)
>>> + * Description
>>> + * Redirect to the registered AF_XDP socket.
>>> + * Return
>>> + * **XDP_REDIRECT** on success, otherwise the action parameter is
>>> returned.
>>> */
>>
>> I think it would be better to make the second argument a 'flags'
>> argument and make values > XDP_TX invalid (like we do in
>> bpf_xdp_redirect_map() now). By allowing any value as return you lose
>> the ability to turn it into a flags argument later...
>>
>
> Yes, but that adds a run-time check. I prefer this non-checked version,
> even though it is a bit less futureproof.
That...seems a bit short-sighted? :)
Can you actually see a difference in your performance numbers?
-Toke
