From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A509C00A89 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A20F22275 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 20:00:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726181AbgKBUAe (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 15:00:34 -0500 Received: from mail.buslov.dev ([199.247.26.29]:60241 "EHLO mail.buslov.dev" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726924AbgKBUAV (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 15:00:21 -0500 Received: from vlad-x1g6 (unknown [IPv6:2a0b:2bc3:193f:1:a5fe:a7d6:6345:fe8d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.buslov.dev (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B24B1FC70; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 22:00:19 +0200 (EET) References: <20201031201644.247605-1-vlad@buslov.dev> <96c51cbb-1a72-d89d-5746-2930786f8afb@mojatatu.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.13; emacs 26.3 From: Vlad Buslov To: Jamal Hadi Salim Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: sched: implement action-specific terse dump In-reply-to: <96c51cbb-1a72-d89d-5746-2930786f8afb@mojatatu.com> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 22:00:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87zh3z5y25.fsf@buslov.dev> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon 02 Nov 2020 at 14:26, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > 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: Okay. Will send V2 shortly. > > >> + if (cookie && !from_act) { >> + if (nla_put(skb, TCA_ACT_COOKIE, cookie->len, cookie->data)) { >> + rcu_read_unlock(); >> + goto nla_put_failure; >> + } > > > cheers, > jamal