From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [iproute2-next PATCH v3 2/2] man: tc-flower: Add explanation for
 range option
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 15:56:56 -0700
Message-ID: <1c2cee31-af86-e285-c9d9-09a3105daa4b@gmail.com>
References: <154232971379.10668.16416943966699679792.stgit@anamhost.jf.intel.com>
 <154232971889.10668.16009642596079446767.stgit@anamhost.jf.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, sridhar.samudrala@intel.com,
        jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us
To: Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@intel.com>,
        stephen@networkplumber.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:40907 "EHLO
        mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1725887AbeKUJ2f (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 21 Nov 2018 04:28:35 -0500
Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id b22-v6so2447635pls.7
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 14:57:00 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <154232971889.10668.16009642596079446767.stgit@anamhost.jf.intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 11/15/18 5:55 PM, Amritha Nambiar wrote:
> Add details explaining filtering based on port ranges.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@intel.com>
> ---
>  man/man8/tc-flower.8 |   12 ++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/man/man8/tc-flower.8 b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
> index 8be8882..768bfa1 100644
> --- a/man/man8/tc-flower.8
> +++ b/man/man8/tc-flower.8
> @@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ flower \- flow based traffic control filter
>  .IR MASKED_IP_TTL " | { "
>  .BR dst_ip " | " src_ip " } "
>  .IR PREFIX " | { "
> -.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } "
> -.IR port_number " } | "
> +.BR dst_port " | " src_port " } { "
> +.IR port_number " | "
> +.B range
> +.IR min_port_number-max_port_number " } | "
>  .B tcp_flags
>  .IR MASKED_TCP_FLAGS " | "
>  .B type
> @@ -227,6 +229,12 @@ Match on layer 4 protocol source or destination port number. Only available for
>  .BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp  " and " sctp
>  which have to be specified in beforehand.
>  .TP
> +.BI range " MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE"
> +Match on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port number. Only
> +available for
> +.BR ip_proto " values " udp ", " tcp  " and " sctp
> +which have to be specified in beforehand.
> +.TP
>  .BI tcp_flags " MASKED_TCP_FLAGS"
>  Match on TCP flags represented as 12bit bitfield in in hexadecimal format.
>  A mask may be optionally provided to limit the bits which are matched. A mask
> 

This prints as:

dst_port NUMBER
src_port NUMBER
      Match  on  layer  4  protocol source or destination port number.
      Only available for ip_proto values udp, tcp and sctp which  have
      to be specified in beforehand.

range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE
      Match  on a range of layer 4 protocol source or destination port
      number. Only available for ip_proto values  udp,  tcp  and  sctp
      which have to be specified in beforehand.

###

That makes it look like range is a standalone option - independent of
dst_port/src_port.

It seems to me the dst_port / src_port should be updated to:

dst_port {NUMBER | range MIN_VALUE-MAX_VALUE}

with the description updated for both options and indented under
dst_port / src_port