On 2019-05-22 11:08 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Tue 21 May 2019 at 16:23, Vlad Buslov wrote:
It seems that culprit in this case is tc_action->order field. It is used
as nla attrtype when dumping actions. Initially it is set according to
ordering of actions of filter that creates them. Howev
On 2019-05-22 1:49 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Wed 22 May 2019 at 20:24, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
Ok, thanks for chasing this. A test case i had in mind is to
maybe have 3 actions. Add the drop in the middle for one
and at the begging for another and see if they are visible
with the patch
On 2019-05-22 2:23 p.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2019-05-22 1:49 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Wed 22 May 2019 at 20:24, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
Ok, thanks for chasing this. A test case i had in mind is to
maybe have 3 actions. Add the drop in the middle for one
and at the begging for
On 2019-05-22 6:20 p.m., Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2019 22:37:16 +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
* removed RFC tags
Why? There is still no upstream user for this (my previous
objections of this being only partially correct aside).
IIRC your point was to get the dumping to work with RT
On 2019-05-24 9:57 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 24/05/2019 14:09, Edward Cree wrote:
I'll put together an RFC patch, anyway
Argh, there's a problem: an action doesn't have a (directly) associated
block, and all the TC offload machinery nowadays is built around blocks.
Since this action might h
On 2019-05-24 11:09 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
Oh, a push rather than pull model?
Right. I thought the switchdev (or what used to be called switchdev)
did a push of some of the tables periodically.
That could work, but I worry about the overhead in the case of very large
numbers of rules (the
On 2019-05-24 2:32 p.m., Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 05/24/2019 06:05 PM, John Hurley wrote:
TC hooks allow the application of filters and actions to packets at both
ingress and egress of the network stack. It is possible, with poor
configuration, that this can produce loops whereby an ingress hoo
n_ops of vlan action, which calculates
the action size, and passes size to tcf_add_notify()/tcf_del_notify().
patch 2 updates the TDC test suite with relevant vlan test cases.
For the series:
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
On 2021-01-08 2:21 p.m., Shannon Nelson wrote:
On 1/8/21 10:26 AM, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
Shannon Nelson wrote:
On 1/6/21 1:55 PM, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
When drivers call the various receive upcalls to receive an skb
to the stack, sometimes that stack can drop the packet. The good
news is
is patch has been tested by syzbot and tested with tdc.py by me.
LGTM.
Initially i was worried about performance impact but i found nothing
observable. We need to add a tdc test for batch (I can share how i did
batch testing at next meet).
Tested-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
Hi,
On 2021-01-18 6:29 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Hi!
Playing with u32 filter's hash table I noticed it is not possible to use
'sample' option with keys larger than 8bits to calculate the hash
bucket.
I have mostly used something like: ht 2:: sample ip protocol 1 0xff
Hoping this is continuin
Hi Phil,
On 2021-01-20 10:23 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Hi Jamal,
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 08:55:11AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2021-01-18 6:29 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Hi!
Playing with u32 filter's hash table I noticed it is not possible to use
'sample' option with k
On 2020-12-14 3:30 p.m., Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
On 2020-12-14 21:35, Cong Wang wrote:
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:13 AM Maxim Mikityanskiy
wrote:
On 2020-12-11 21:16, Cong Wang wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 7:26 AM Maxim Mikityanskiy
wrote:
Interesting, please explain how your HTB
On 2020-12-16 6:47 a.m., Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
On 2020-12-15 18:37, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[..]
Same question above:
Is there a limit to the number of classes that can be created?
Yes, the commit message of the mlx5 patch lists the limitations of our
NICs. Basically, it's 256
On 2020-12-19 9:53 a.m., Shay Agroskin wrote:
Lorenzo Bianconi writes:
for the moment I do not know if this area is used for other purposes.
Do you think there are other use-cases for it?
Sorry to interject:
Does it make sense to use it to store arbitrary metadata or a scratchpad
in this
On 2020-12-21 4:01 a.m., Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
On Sat, 19 Dec 2020 10:30:57 -0500
Sorry to interject:
Does it make sense to use it to store arbitrary metadata or a scratchpad
in this space? Something equivalent to skb->cb which is lacking in
XDP.
Well, XDP have the data_meta area. B
On 2020-11-17 2:00 p.m., Joergen Andreasen wrote:
The 11/17/2020 14:30, Xiaoliang Yang wrote:
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
content is safe
This patch introduce a redundancy flow action to implement frame
replication and elimination for reliability,
Hi,
On 2020-11-20 2:32 a.m., Xiaoliang Yang wrote:
Hi Jamal,
On 2020-11-19 0:11, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
The 11/17/2020 14:30, Xiaoliang Yang wrote:
EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
[..]
We already have mirroring + ability to add/pop tags.
Would the
ort to fix the over mtu for
defrag in act_ct.
Overall it looks much better to me now, so:
Acked-by: Cong Wang
LGTM as well.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
slov
LGTM, thanks for the effort
.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
On 2020-11-24 4:28 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Mon 23 Nov 2020 at 23:22, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:09:02 +0200 Vlad Buslov wrote:
Currently both filter and action flags use same "TCA_" prefix which makes
them hard to distinguish to code and confusing for users. Create aliase
On 2020-11-24 7:13 a.m., Roi Dayan wrote:
On 2020-11-24 11:39 AM, Roi Dayan wrote:
[..]
Hi,
I didn't debug yet but with this commit I am failing to add a tc
rule I always could before. also the error msg doesn't make sense.
Example:
# tc filter add dev enp8s0f0 protocol 802.1Q parent f
later.
Acked-by: Cong Wang
Same here.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
FWIW, I see the pragmatic need for this and so; cant think
of a better way to do this. Patch one could probably go in its
own merit.
Wenxu, please Cc maintainers in the future - makes it easier
to get feedback.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
On 2020-11-12 4:43 a.m., we...@ucloud.cn
This nagged me:
What happens if all the frags dont make it out?
Should you at least return an error code(from tcf_fragment?)
and get the action err counters incremented?
cheers,
jamal
On 2020-11-15 8:05 a.m., wenxu wrote:
在 2020/11/15 2:05, Cong Wang 写道:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 9:44 PM wrote
While we bid goodbye to 2020, here's some good hopeful news for 2021.
cheers,
jamal
Forwarded Message
Subject: [NetDev-People] Announcing Netdev 0x15
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:54:31 -0700
From: Tom Herbert via people
Reply-To: Tom Herbert
To: peo...@netdevconf.info
Hello
On 2020-10-18 8:16 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Sat 17 Oct 2020 at 14:20, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-16 12:42 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
Either one sounds appealing - the refactoring feels simpler
as opposed to a->terse_print().
With such refactoring we action type will be prin
On 2020-10-19 11:18 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Mon 19 Oct 2020 at 16:48, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-18 8:16 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
[..]
That could be a good thing, no? you get to see the action name with the
error. Its really not a big deal if you decide to do a->terse_pr
On 2020-10-21 4:19 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Tue 20 Oct 2020 at 15:29, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-19 11:18 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
My worry is you have a very specific use case for your hardware or
maybe it is ovs - where counters are uniquely tied to filters and
there is no
On 2020-10-23 8:48 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Thu 22 Oct 2020 at 17:05, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-21 4:19 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Tue 20 Oct 2020 at 15:29, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-19 11:18 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
My worry is you have a very specific use case for
ion kind before returning from action_until->print_aopt()
callbacks. This is necessary to support terse dump mode in following patch
in the series.
Signed-off-by: Vlad Buslov
Suggested-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
On 2020-10-26 7:28 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Sat 24 Oct 2020 at 20:40, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[..]
Yes, that makes sense. I guess introducing something like 'tc action -br
ls ..' mode implemented by means of existing terse flag + new 'also
output action index' fla
On 2020-10-26 1:46 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Mon 26 Oct 2020 at 19:12, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-26 7:28 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Sat 24 Oct 2020 at 20:40, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[..]
Yes, that makes sense. I guess introducing something like 'tc action -br
ls ..&
On 2020-10-26 2:03 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Mon 26 Oct 2020 at 20:01, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-10-26 1:46 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
yeah, something like TCA_ACT_FLAGS_TERSE.
new tcf_action_dump_terse() takes one more field which says to
include or not the cookies since that is
Thanks Vlad. Ive run the basic test and it looks good.
One thing i discovered while testing is that if the
cookie is set, we also want it in the dump. Your earlier
comment that it only costs if it was set is on point.
So please remove that check below:
> + if (cookie && !from_act) {
> +
CA_FLAG_LARGE_DUMP_ON
in the uapi header will help. Of course that would be a separate
patch which will require conversion code in both the kernel and user
space.
FWIW, the patch is good for what i tested. So even if you do send an
update with a name change please add:
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
the action). This
is different from filter terse dump where index is excluded (filter can be
identified by its own handle).
Move tcf_action_dump_terse() function to the beginning of source file in
order to call it from tcf_dump_walker().
Signed-off-by: Vlad Buslov
Suggested-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
On 2020-11-04 10:19 p.m., David Ahern wrote:
[..]
User experience keeps getting brought up, but I also keep reading the
stance that BPF users can not expect a consistent experience unless they
are constantly chasing latest greatest versions of *ALL* S/W related to
BPF. That is not a realistic e
On 2020-11-05 4:01 p.m., Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 6:05 AM Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2020-11-04 10:19 p.m., David Ahern wrote:
[..]
[..]
2cents feedback from a dabbler in ebpf on user experience:
What David described above *has held me back*.
Over time it seems
On 2021-03-26 9:09 a.m., Simon Horman wrote:
From: Baowen Zheng
Add selftest cases in action police for packets per second.
These tests depend on corresponding iproute2 command support.
Signed-off-by: Baowen Zheng
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman
Gracias.
Reviewed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
On 2021-04-07 7:50 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 8:36 AM Vlad Buslov wrote:
Action init code increments reference counter when it changes an action.
This is the desired behavior for cls API which needs to obtain action
reference for every classifier that points to action. Howev
On 2021-04-08 3:50 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
On Thu 08 Apr 2021 at 02:50, Cong Wang wrote:
Origins of setting ovr based on NLM_F_REPLACE are lost since this code
goes back to Linus' Linux-2.6.12-rc2 commit. Jamal, do you know if this
is the expected behavior or just something unintended?
Se
Hi Petr,
On 2021-04-08 9:38 a.m., Petr Machata wrote:
The TC action "trap" is used to instruct the HW datapath to drop the
matched packet and transfer it for processing in the SW pipeline. If
instead it is desirable to forward the packet and transferring a _copy_ to
the SW pipeline, there is no
On 2021-04-08 5:25 p.m., Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 10:05:07 -0400 Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2021-04-08 9:38 a.m., Petr Machata wrote:
The TC action "trap" is used to instruct the HW datapath to drop the
matched packet and transfer it for processing in the SW pi
On 2021-04-09 7:03 a.m., Petr Machata wrote:
Jamal Hadi Salim writes:
I am concerned about adding new opcodes which only make sense if you
offload (or make sense only if you are running in s/w).
Those opcodes are intended to be generic abstractions so the dispatcher
can decide what to do
On 2021-04-09 9:43 a.m., Petr Machata wrote:
Jamal Hadi Salim writes:
Does the spectrum not support multiple actions?
e.g with a policy like:
match blah action trap action drop skip_sw
Trap drops implicitly. We need a "trap, but don't drop". Expressed in
terms of exis
Hi Phil,
On 2021-01-22 8:59 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Jamal,
On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 06:25:22AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[...]
My gut feel is user space is the right/easier spot to fix this
as long as it doesnt break the working setup of 8b.
One last attempt at clarifying the situation
On 2021-01-29 10:14 p.m., Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 6:14 AM Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2021-01-29 9:06 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
Which leads to:
Why not extend the general feature so one can register for optional
callbacks not just for expire but also add/del
On 2021-02-01 7:33 a.m., Simon Horman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:30:00AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
Ido's comment is important: Why not make packet rate vs byte rate
mutually exclusive? If someone uses packet rate then you make sure
they dont interleave with attributes for
Hi Phil,
I couldnt tell by inspection if what used to work before continues to.
In particular the kernel version does consider the divisor when folding.
Two examples that currently work, if you can try them:
Most used scheme:
---
tc filter add dev $DEV parent 999:0 protocol ip prio 10 u32 \
ht
On 2021-02-04 9:04 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Jamal,
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 08:19:55AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
I couldnt tell by inspection if what used to work before continues to.
In particular the kernel version does consider the divisor when folding.
That's correct. And so do
sorry - meant to say, tdc is in kernel tree:
tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing
cheers,
jamal
On 2021-02-04 9:50 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:34:01AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2021-02-04 9:04 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Jamal,
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 08:19:55AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
I couldnt tell by inspection if what used to work before
On 2021-02-04 11:50 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 10:28:26AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2021-02-04 9:50 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 09:34:01AM -0500, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2021-02-04 9:04 a.m., Phil Sutter wrote:
Jamal,
On Thu, Feb 04
We are pleased to announce the opening of Call For
Submissions(CFS) for Netdev 0x15.
For overview of topics, submissions and requirements
please visit:
https://netdevconf.info/0x15/submit-proposal.html
For all submitted sessions, we employ a double blind
review process carried out by the Program
rate and burst
parameters.
...
Sorry, I missed CCing a number of interested parties when posting
this patch-set. I've added them to this email.
Ref:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20210312140831.23346-1-simon.hor...@netronome.com/
For 2/3:
Reviewed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
If you submit o
On 2020-08-09 2:15 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:28 PM Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
From: Jamal Hadi Salim
his classifier, in the same spirit as the tc skb mark classifier,
provides a generic (fast lookup) approach to filter on the hash value
and optional mask.
like skb->m
On 2020-08-11 7:25 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 4:41 PM Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[..]
Not sure if I get you correctly, but with a combined implementation
you can do above too, right? Something like:
(AND case)
$TC filter add dev $DEV1 parent : protocol ip prio 3 handle
On 2020-08-16 2:59 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 5:52 AM Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[..]
How do you know whether to use hash or mark or both
for that specific key?
Hmm, you can just unconditionally pass skb->hash and skb->mark,
no? Something lik
On 2020-08-17 3:47 p.m., Cong Wang wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 4:19 AM Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
[..]
There is no ambiguity of intent in the fw case, there is only one field.
In the case of having multiple fields it is ambigious if you
unconditionally look.
Example: policy says to match
with tcp at the time; so left udp dependency on netfilter
alone.
cheers,
jamal
commit 4d130b0a883b4aebc36a88ca116746594e176c6a
Author: Jamal Hadi Salim
Date: Fri Nov 25 15:45:48 2016 -0400
transparent proxy workaround so we can get the tcaction to work
diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_input.c
On 2019-06-24 12:49 p.m., Eric Dumazet wrote:
Well, I would simply remove the skb_orphan() call completely.
My experience: You still need to call skb_orphan() from the lower level
(and set the skb destructor etc).
cheers,
jamal
On 2019-06-24 11:26 p.m., Joe Stringer wrote:
[..]
I haven't got as far as UDP yet, but I didn't see any need for a
dependency on netfilter.
I'd be curious to see what you did. My experience, even for TCP is
the socket(transparent/tproxy) lookup code (to set skb->sk either
listening or establi
On 2019-06-24 6:13 p.m., John Hurley wrote:
These patches aim to prevent act_mirred causing stack overflow events from
recursively calling packet xmit or receive functions. Such events can
occur with poor TC configuration that causes packets to travel in loops
within the system.
Florian Westphal
On 2019-06-25 5:06 a.m., John Hurley wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:30 AM Eyal Birger wrote:
I'm not sure on the history of why a value of 4 was selected here but
it seems to fall into line with my findings.
Back then we could only loop in one direction (as opposed to two right
now) - so
On 29/04/18 08:31 PM, David Miller wrote:
Well, two things:
1) The congestion control info is opt-in, meaning that the user gets
it in the dump if they ask for it.
This information is opt-in, because otherwise the dumps get really
large.
Therefore, emitting this stuff by defau
On 08/05/18 08:59 AM, Michel Machado wrote:
Overall it looks good to me, just one thing below:
+struct Qdisc_ops gkprio_qdisc_ops __read_mostly = {
+ .id = "gkprio",
+ .priv_size = sizeof(struct gkprio_sched_data),
+ .enqueue = gkprio_
On 08/05/18 10:27 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
Have you considered using skb->prio instead of peeking into the packet
header.
Also have you looked at the dsmark qdisc?
dsmark modifies ds fields, while this one just maps ds fields i
Sorry for the latency..
On 09/05/18 01:37 PM, Michel Machado wrote:
On 05/09/2018 10:43 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 08/05/18 10:27 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim
wrote:
I like the suggestion of extending skbmod to mark skbprio based on ds.
Given
: Yotam Gigi
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
that!
Signed-off-by: Alexander Aring
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
-by: Alexander Aring
Reviewed-by: Yotam Gigi
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
From: Jamal Hadi Salim
When a user dumps an existing established tcp socket state
via inet diag, it is possible to retrieve the congestion control
details.
When an the sock is destroyed, the generated event has all the
details available in the dump sans congestion control info.
This patch fixes
Note that the action with index 27 is omitted from the report.
Fixes: 4b3550ef530c ("[NET_SCHED]: Use nla_nest_start/nla_nest_end")"
Signed-off-by: Craig Dillabaugh
Good catch.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
ave an error talking to the kernel
%
patch 1 adds callback in tc_action_ops of mirred action, which calculates
the action size, and passes size to tcf_add_notify()/tcf_del_notify().
patch 2 updates the TDC test suite with relevant test cases.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
example test case file to
demonstrate how the scapy block works in the test cases.
Shouldve said V3 in the subject line - but fwiw,
ACKed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
On 17-08-19 01:35 AM, Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan wrote:
Define the multiplexing and aggregation (MAP) ether type 0xDA1A. This
is needed for receiving data in the MAP protocol like RMNET. This is
not an officially registered ID.
Signed-off-by: Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan
---
include/uap
On 17-08-20 06:12 PM, David Miller wrote:
+#define ETH_P_MAP 0xDA1A /* Multiplexing and Aggregation Protocol
+ * NOT AN OFFICIALLY REGISTERED ID ]
You cant just arbitrarly assign yourself an ethertype. The IEEE may
never issue you one - and if they do, it will likely not be the one
you want i
On 17-08-21 03:58 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:47 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: gfree.w...@vip.163.com
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 15:23:24 +0800
From: Gao Feng
Add the invalid handle "0" check to avoid unnecessary search, because
the qdisc uses the skb->priority as the handle
On 17-08-24 07:51 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
This is not needed if we move them up properly.
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
On 17-08-24 07:51 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
Like for TC actions, ->delete() is a special case,
we have to prepare and fill the notification before delete
otherwise would get use-after-free after we remove the
reference count.
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
the last refcnt into ->delete(),
right after releasing tree lock. This is fine because the class is
already removed from hash when holding the lock.
For those who also use ->put() as ->unbind(), just rename them to reflect
this change.
Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang
I
n, we can just compare the pointers when collision.
And this only affects slow paths, has no impact to fast path,
thanks to the pointer ->tp_c.
Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim
Cc: Jiri Pirko
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang
Nice work. should open the doors for Jiri now.
Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim
cheers,
jamal
This is a small update to the community on the Netdev 0x13 conference
(March 20-22, in Prague, Czech Republic)
https://www.netdevconf.org/0x13
Early registration fees end today at 23:59 EST.
To Register: https://www.netdevconf.org/0x13/registration.html
Our bursaries are also going to close toda
On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote:
The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is according to the
IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and the paper
[PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem].
However, a lot of necessary
On 2019-02-25 8:43 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote:
The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is according
to the
IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00] and the
paper
[PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address
On 2019-02-25 9:11 a.m., Dave Taht wrote:
Jamal Hadi Salim writes:
On 2019-02-25 8:43 a.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2019-02-25 5:20 a.m., Leslie Monis wrote:
The current implementation of the PIE queuing discipline is
according to the
IETF draft [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pan-aqm
On 2019-04-26 8:13 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
Sure; this block is (still slightly abridged)
if (a->ops && a->ops->stats_update) {
struct efx_tc_counter_index *ctr;
ctr = efx_tc_flower_get_counter_by_index(efx, a->tcfa_index);
if (IS_ERR(ctr)) {
rc = PTR_ERR(ctr);
On 2019-05-04 2:27 a.m., Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Fri, 3 May 2019 16:06:55 +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
Introduce a new offload command TC_CLSFLOWER_STATS_BYINDEX, similar to
the existing TC_CLSFLOWER_STATS but specifying an action_index (the
tcfa_index of the action), which is called for each
On 2019-05-07 8:27 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 06/05/2019 13:41, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2019-05-04 2:27 a.m., Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Fri, 3 May 2019 16:06:55 +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
[..]
I don't know much of anything about RTM_GETACTION, but it doesn't appear
to be p
On 2019-05-08 1:07 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 08/05/2019 15:02, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
The lazy thing most people have done is essentially assume that
there is a stat per filter rule...
I wouldnt call it the 'the right thing'
Yup, that's why I'm trying to not do
On 2019-05-15 3:39 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
[..]
A point for discussion: would it be better if, instead of the tcfa_index
(for which the driver has to know the rules about which flow_action
types share a namespace), we had some kind of globally unique cookie?
In the same way that rule->coo
On 2019-05-15 3:42 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
Required for support of shared counters (and possibly other shared per-
action entities in future).
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree
---
include/net/flow_offload.h | 1 +
net/sched/cls_api.c| 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a
On 2019-05-15 3:42 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
In the TC_CLSFLOWER_STATS callback from fl_hw_update_stats(), pass an
array of struct flow_stats_entry, one for each action in the flow rule.
Current drivers (which do not collect per-action stats, but rather per-
rule) call flow_stats_update() in a
On 2019-05-17 1:14 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 17/05/2019 16:27, Edward Cree wrote:
I'm now leaning towards the
approach of adding "unsigned long cookie" to struct flow_action_entry
and populating it with (unsigned long)act in tc_setup_flow_action().
For concreteness, here's what that look
On 2019-05-20 11:26 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 18/05/2019 21:39, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 2019-05-17 1:14 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 17/05/2019 16:27, Edward Cree wrote:
Unless *I* missed something, I'm not changing the TC<=>user-space API at
all. If user space specifi
On 2019-05-20 11:37 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 19/05/2019 01:22, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 04:27:29PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
Thanks. Looking at net/netfilter/nfnetlink_acct.c, it looks as though you
don't have a u32 index in there; for the cookie approach, would
On 2019-05-20 11:46 a.m., Edward Cree wrote:
I can't see anything stats-offload related in net/sched/cls_u32.c (just
SW stats dumping in u32_dump()) and it doesn't call
tcf_exts_stats_update() either. Looking through ixgbe code I also
don't see any sign there of stats gathering for offloa
On 2019-05-20 12:10 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
On 20/05/2019 16:38, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
That is fine then if i could do:
tc actions add action drop index 104
then
followed by for example the two filters you show below..
That seems to work.
nice.
Is your hardware not using explicit
On 2019-05-20 12:29 p.m., Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
Assuming in this case you added by value the actions?
To be clear on the terminology:
"By Value" implies you add the filter and action in the
same command line.
"By Reference" implies you first create the action then
c
1 - 100 of 1226 matches
Mail list logo
