From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 0/5] net_sched: Add support for IFE action Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:40:45 -0500 Message-ID: <56CF82ED.3080307@mojatatu.com> References: <1456147304-13355-1-git-send-email-jhs@emojatatu.com> <56CB3B90.8030206@iogearbox.net> <56CC4BEA.70108@mojatatu.com> <56CC5CB6.1030807@iogearbox.net> <56CC6C75.1000903@mojatatu.com> <56CC7C20.3090302@iogearbox.net> <56CDA6E8.7010604@mojatatu.com> <56CDECE5.5040604@iogearbox.net> <56CEF242.5090908@mojatatu.com> <56CF7370.7020100@iogearbox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com To: Daniel Borkmann , davem@davemloft.net Return-path: Received: from mail-ig0-f195.google.com ([209.85.213.195]:36720 "EHLO mail-ig0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751015AbcBYWkx (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:40:53 -0500 Received: by mail-ig0-f195.google.com with SMTP id xg9so2281822igb.3 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 14:40:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56CF7370.7020100@iogearbox.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 16-02-25 04:34 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 02/25/2016 01:23 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On 16-02-24 12:48 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >>> On 02/24/2016 01:49 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > [...] >>>> Drivers do set the hash. My use case is slightly different. >>>> I have a NIC which has an embedded cavium processor. This thing >>>> strips off the TLV and uses the hash to select the host MSI. >>>> Only thing we dont use at the moment is queue_mapping. >>> >>> Ok, but the example says ingress qdisc. ;) I presume the driver for the >>> NIC and the offloading parts are non-public? :/ >> >> Well, it is not exactly mellanox or intel - but I am sure someone would >> be willing to sell that NIC. >> >>> So, without them, placing >>> this on ingress qdisc doesn't seem much useful wrt the skb hash example, >>> and most people only have the software part (for ingress I mean) >>> available. >> >> Do you want me to take skbbhash out? I just want to get this set in then >> worry about adding and modifying. > > Well, if the NIC driver and offloading parts for ife are not available > (or cannot be made available) If you are willing to pay for one i can have one sold to you. Note: There is no dependency on such a NIC. You asked for an example of how one would use skbhash and i pointed it out to you. Infact nothing in the commit notes pointed to any NIC. >in the upstream kernel tree, then you have > to assume that everyone else can _only_ use this with the existing tc > facilities in the kernel. And as such, the whole set needs to be evaluated, > I think this is nothing new. ;-) > Seriously this is getting to a ridiculous level now. I gave a talk - which you attended. I wrote a paper which you may have at minimal glanced at. I have had discussions with you on this very subject. And as soon as i posted the patches your statements led from you needing a good use case to why not use a netdev and why i have all these things that are not very useful. None of which came up before. For someone who works on ebpf - where there is plenty of code that noone gets to see you are making rather bold statements. > That is why I asked for a "typical setup" and use-case earlier. And if > it doesn't have any obvious ones in upstream context without the missing > pieces, then the code might linger around unused by anyone. So taking out > these parts would be highly preferred (unless there's a _good_ reason not > to). > So is there anything that is useful in your view? cheers, jamal