From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 0/9] net: sched: introduce chain templates
 support with offloading to mlxsw
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 08:18:17 +0200
Message-ID: <20180628061817.GB2413@nanopsycho>
References: <20180625210148.9386-1-jiri@resnulli.us>
 <20180625215850.001276b8@cakuba.netronome.com>
 <20180626064355.GQ2161@nanopsycho>
 <CAJpBn1xigrmrHdfP4itPCPSnfkJVi3H3513K5KO=ZJEAnRUgNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180626071217.GR2161@nanopsycho>
 <20180626141858.7f18730f@cakuba.netronome.com>
 <20180627075017.GA2007@nanopsycho>
 <0272f671-802b-30b6-6ca2-2ffc1e205664@intel.com>
 <CAM_iQpUiod0iG=h8STfkKEPQoJUe==B0Q3oPj3kR5Wy7+5FBqA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: sridhar.samudrala@intel.com,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>,
        john.hurley@netronome.com, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
        mlxsw@mellanox.com
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f196.google.com ([209.85.128.196]:41667 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753497AbeF1GTq (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 28 Jun 2018 02:19:46 -0400
Received: by mail-wr0-f196.google.com with SMTP id h10-v6so4187804wrq.8
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 23:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpUiod0iG=h8STfkKEPQoJUe==B0Q3oPj3kR5Wy7+5FBqA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 07:04:32PM CEST, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 9:46 AM Samudrala, Sridhar
><sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 6/27/2018 12:50 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > if you don't like "tc filter template add dev dummy0 ingress", how
>> > about:
>> > "tc template add dev dummy0 ingress ..."
>> > "tc template add dev dummy0 ingress chain 22 ..."
>> > that makes more sense I think.
>
>Better than 'tc filter template', but this doesn't reflect 'template'
>is a template of tc filter, it could be an action etc., since it is in the

It's a template of filter per chain. I don't understand how it could be
an action...


>same position with 'tc action/filter/qdisc'.
>
>
>>
>> Isn't it possible to avoid introducing another keyword 'template',
>>
>> Can't we just do
>>        tc chain add dev dummy0 ingress flower chain_index 0
>> to create a chain that takes any types of flower rules with index 0
>> and
>>       tc chain add dev dummy0 ingress flower chain_index 22
>>              dst_mac 00:00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:FF:FF
>>       tc chain add dev dummy0 ingress flower chain_index 23
>>              dst_ip 192.168.0.0/16
>> to create 2 chains 22 and 23 that allow rules with specific fields.
>
>Sounds good too. Since filter chain can be shared by qdiscs,
>a 'tc chain' sub-command makes sense, and would probably make
>it easier to be shared.

We don't have such specific object. It is implicit. We create it
whenever someone users it. Either filter of chain. I don't like new "tc
chain" object in cmdline. It really isn't.