Re: [PATCH net-next 00/13] Control action percpu counters allocation by netlink flag

[Roman Mashak <mrv@mojatatu.com>]

Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> writes:

> On 2019-10-26 5:44 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
>>
>
>> Okay, I understand now what you suggest. But why not unify cls and act
>> API, and always have flags parsed in tcf_action_init_1() as
>> TCA_ACT_ROOT_FLAGS like I suggested in one of my previous mails? That
>> way we don't have to pass pointers around.
>
> That would work.
> I am being a sucker for optimization - one flag for a batch
> of actions vs one per action.
> It is a good compromise, go for it.

But why do we need to have two attributes, one at the root level
TCA_ROOT_FLAGS and the other at the inner TCA_ACT_* level, but in fact
serving the same purpose -- passing flags for optimizations?

The whole nest of action attributes including root ones is passed as 3rd
argument of tcf_exts_validate(), so it can be validated and extracted at
that level and passed to tcf_action_init_1() as pointer to 32-bit flag,
admittedly it's ugly given the growing number of arguments to
tcf_action_init_1(). With old iproute2 the pointer will always be NULL,
so I think backward compatibilty will be preserved.