From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] flow_dissector: dissect tunnel info
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 10:08:57 +0200
Message-ID: <20171004080856.GB6378@netronome.com>
References: <1506933676-20121-1-git-send-email-simon.horman@netronome.com>
 <1506933676-20121-3-git-send-email-simon.horman@netronome.com>
 <CALx6S34ULzKX=Q+CSdEuXVAA12MMM1oQ=x7JEV8EmD-2qaviNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171003094052.GA20592@netronome.com>
 <CALx6S37K3Gif=AGk48CXs9JgrcDbdpfqMZWK+0j95UHG0hvpZg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        oss-drivers@netronome.com
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f182.google.com ([209.85.128.182]:50640 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751209AbdJDIJC (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 4 Oct 2017 04:09:02 -0400
Received: by mail-wr0-f182.google.com with SMTP id b21so8045395wrg.7
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 04 Oct 2017 01:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S37K3Gif=AGk48CXs9JgrcDbdpfqMZWK+0j95UHG0hvpZg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:17:46AM -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 2:40 AM, Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 01:37:55PM -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
> >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 1:41 AM, Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com> wrote:
> >> > Move dissection of tunnel info from the flower classifier to the flow
> >> > dissector where all other dissection occurs.  This should not have any
> >> > behavioural affect on other users of the flow dissector.
> >
> > ...
> 
> > I feel that we are circling back the perennial issue of flower using the
> > flow dissector in a somewhat broader/different way than many/all other
> > users of the flow dissector.
> >
> Simon,
> 
> It's more like __skb_flow_dissect is already an incredibly complex
> function and because of that it's difficult to maintain. We need to
> measure changes against that fact. For this patch, there is precisely
> one user (cls_flower.c) and it's not at all clear to me if there will
> be ever any more (e.g. for hashing we don't need tunnel info). IMO, it
> should be just as easy and less convolution for everyone to have
> flower call __skb_flow_dissect_tunnel_info directly and not call if
> from __skb_flow_dissect.

Hi Tom,

my original suggestion was just that, but Jiri indicated a strong preference
for the approach taken by this patch. I think we need to widen the
participants in this discussion.