From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PKT_SCHED]: Allow using nfmark as key in U32 classifier. Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 01:13:38 +0100 Message-ID: <20050102001338.GV32419@postel.suug.ch> References: <20041230174313.GB32419@postel.suug.ch> <1104469111.1049.219.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041231110836.GD32419@postel.suug.ch> <1104505142.1048.262.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041231153930.GN32419@postel.suug.ch> <1104511494.1048.303.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041231181153.GP32419@postel.suug.ch> <1104526311.1047.379.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050101183230.GT32419@postel.suug.ch> <1104622934.1047.460.camel@jzny.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "David S. Miller" , netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: jamal Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1104622934.1047.460.camel@jzny.localdomain> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * jamal <1104622934.1047.460.camel@jzny.localdomain> 2005-01-01 18:42 > what happened to the good old SEL TLV (which i believe we called SEL2 > now); or maybe thats what contains this TLV? Please look at the patch I posted in the other post. I think we missudnerstand each other. > > So we can put more into the selector if needed without breaking > > compatibility. TCA_EMATCH_TREE_HDR currently contains `nmatches' > > specifying N and progid holding the PID you talked about. > > Ok, so i think you may be saying the old selector stays intact then > (sans the matches)? Right, old selector TLV statys as-is. Although I have to look u32 closely before I can make final statements. > Why do you need to specify "nmatches". It's mainly a shortcut to validate precedence jumps so I can avoid traversing the RTA chain twice. It could be avoided but is quite handy to speed things up and also acts for validation purposes to check consistency of the match list. > What is TCA_EMATCH_TREE_LIST for? Looks like another TLV nesting. Not > needed, you just plumb the T=1,..T=N right after the header. No, what if we need some more stuff in the selector TLV? We can't modify the header TLV w/o breaking backwards compatibility. Adding this addtional nesting allows to simply add stuff after TREE_LIST TLV. > I think the way you have it is fine - and believe it is the way the > action code has it for the list. You're using a maximum prio aren't you? I use a RTA_OK() loop supporting unlimited number of matches without the need to allocate rtattr pointer array.