On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 11:43 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 17:52 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 08:28 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-10-29 at 16:00 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote: > > > > > > > This patch do not add dissection code: it use the information provided > > > > by the available flowi4 structure. Moreover the skb is not available on > > > > the calling site (in __ip_route_output_key_hash) and pushing it all the > > > > way will require a lot of intrusive changes. Do you think it's the > > > > better option ? > > > > > > If skb is provided, then we could use its information. > > > > I see your point, but providing an skb to __ip_route_output_key_hash() > > is not very viable: it has a lot of indirect callers which are > > problematic, i.e.: > > > > __ip_route_output_key() > > ip_route_output_flow() > > inet_csk_route_req() > > tcp_v4_send_synack() <- skb available here, but created using dst > > information. > > > > I never said it was trivial. > > I said : "If skb is provided, then we can use its l4hash" > > If not, then sure, a flow-based hash fallback is better than nothing.
Thank you for all the feedback. I'll resubmit using the flow-based hash. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
