Re: [patch net-next v3] tc: introduce OpenFlow classifier

[Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>]

On 04/10/15 07:46, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 11:30:06AM CEST, daniel@iogearbox.net wrote:
>> On 04/10/2015 11:12 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> ...

> I might be missing something, but to me, the codes of cls_flow and
> cls_openflow are very different. Merging cls_openflow with for example
> cls_fw makes similar sense to me.
>
> cls_flow is no match-action classifier. All skbs are hashed into classid
> of pre-defined range. You cannot speficy explicit action for match.
>
> On the other hand cls_openflow is match-action classifier (similar to
> for example bpf - might make more sense to me to merge it with bpf).
>
> What I say is, lets do things clearly, separate, not "overmerge" stuff.
>
> I will definitelly loose name "openflow" for my future submission to not
> to confuse people.
>

I think dropping the term "openflow" would be reasonable. I am not sure
if allowing for this to be part of cls_flow is reasonable.
I do think it makes sense to add another classifier that would do what
Dave was asking for. Such a classifier will have more advantages than
anything else imo since it will get most of the classification almost
for free.

cheers,
jamal