public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: cedric.jehasse@luminex.be, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 1/2] net/sched: cls_flower: remove unions from fl_flow_key
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 08:34:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260316083447.GD1369074@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260314100002.122c8c73@kernel.org>

On Sat, Mar 14, 2026 at 10:00:02AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 13:26:51 +0000 Simon Horman wrote:
> > It seems to me that the use of a union is intentional here, as either IPv4
> > or IPv6 addresses can be present in each case - never both.  And that
> > control.addr_type and enc_control.addr_type are intended to allow
> > differentiation of the address type in use for each of these unions.
> 
> My reading was that the initial author simply wanted to save space in
> the struct.
> 
> As the commit message explains this leads to complications in the logic
> which sets the keys. The alternative is to complicate
> FL_KEY_SET_IF_MASKED - doable, but given that the union feels like a
> micro-optimization in the first place the simpler approach of separating
> fields seems okay too? (TBH my mind also initially went down the
> FL_KEY_SET_IF_MASKED rabbit hole but once I saw the simplicity of
> Cedric's patch I changed my mind)

Sure, now this has been put to me more than once I agree.

But if we go this way, then can we also simplify some of the existing logic?
As a follow-up?

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-16  8:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-11 10:46 [PATCH net-next v8 0/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add partial support for TCAM entries Cedric Jehasse via B4 Relay
2026-03-11 10:46 ` [PATCH net-next v8 1/2] net/sched: cls_flower: remove unions from fl_flow_key Cedric Jehasse via B4 Relay
2026-03-13 13:26   ` Simon Horman
2026-03-13 14:31     ` Cedric Jehasse
2026-03-14 17:00     ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-16  8:34       ` Simon Horman [this message]
2026-03-16 23:19         ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-17 14:38           ` Simon Horman
2026-03-11 10:46 ` [PATCH net-next v8 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add partial support for TCAM entries Cedric Jehasse via B4 Relay
2026-03-17  9:50 ` [PATCH net-next v8 0/2] " patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260316083447.GD1369074@kernel.org \
    --to=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=cedric.jehasse@luminex.be \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
    --cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox