From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: Fwd: u32 ht filters
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 08:38:46 +0100
Message-ID: <20180208073846.GA2041@nanopsycho>
References: <9c8f997d-339c-5088-0bb5-124e9f55f02d@itcare.pl>
 <CAM_iQpX_CG9casEeFiXtnBNUg15ZWrdskp3JbFnXd=zXBeb7cg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180207070148.GA2149@nanopsycho.orion>
 <CAM_iQpXkmSPGXfbOyLH-BMT+_u4MfEG+y78H5JNr9x1i=nNTJw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        =?utf-8?B?UGF3ZcWC?= Staszewski <pstaszewski@itcare.pl>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]:55429 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750807AbeBHHis (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 8 Feb 2018 02:38:48 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 143so7562897wma.5
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 07 Feb 2018 23:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpXkmSPGXfbOyLH-BMT+_u4MfEG+y78H5JNr9x1i=nNTJw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 12:08:36AM CET, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com wrote:
>On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>> Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 06:09:15AM CET, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com wrote:
>>>Hi, Jiri
>>>
>>>Your  commit 7fa9d974f3c2a016b9accb18f4ee2ed2a738585c
>>>breaks the tc script by Paweł. Please find below for details.
>>
>> Did you do the bisection?
>> The commit just uses block struct instead of q, but since they
>> are in 1:1 relation, that should be equvivalent. So basically you still
>> have per-qdisc hashtables for u32.
>
>Well, at least the following fixes the problem here. But I am not sure
>if it is expected too for shared block among multiple qdiscs.

For shared block, block->q is null.


>
>
>@@ -338,7 +330,7 @@ static struct hlist_head *tc_u_common_hash;
>
> static unsigned int tc_u_hash(const struct tcf_proto *tp)
> {
>-       return hash_ptr(tp->chain->block, U32_HASH_SHIFT);
>+       return hash_ptr(tp->chain->block->q, U32_HASH_SHIFT);
> }
>
> static struct tc_u_common *tc_u_common_find(const struct tcf_proto *tp)
>@@ -348,7 +340,7 @@ static struct tc_u_common *tc_u_common_find(const
>struct tcf_proto *tp)
>
>        h = tc_u_hash(tp);
>        hlist_for_each_entry(tc, &tc_u_common_hash[h], hnode) {
>-               if (tc->block == tp->chain->block)
>+               if (tc->block->q == tp->chain->block->q)

:O I don't get it. tc->block is pointer, tc->block->q is pointer. And
they are different at the same time for non-shared block.


>                        return tc;
>        }
>        return NULL;