From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12 net-next,v2] add flow_rule infrastructure
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 08:46:08 +0100
Message-ID: <20181121074608.GC2264@nanopsycho>
References: <20181119001519.12124-1-pablo@netfilter.org>
 <20181119.121229.2109900411029672811.davem@davemloft.net>
 <20181120073912.GA2264@nanopsycho>
 <20181120.091640.1759508282843765424.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: pablo@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        thomas.lendacky@amd.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
        ariel.elior@cavium.com, michael.chan@broadcom.com,
        santosh@chelsio.com, madalin.bucur@nxp.com,
        yisen.zhuang@huawei.com, salil.mehta@huawei.com,
        jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, tariqt@mellanox.com,
        saeedm@mellanox.com, jiri@mellanox.com, idosch@mellanox.com,
        jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com,
        grygorii.strashko@ti.com, andrew@lunn.ch,
        vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, alexandre.torgue@st.com,
        joabreu@synopsys.com, linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com,
        ganeshgr@chelsio.com, ogerlitz@mellanox.com
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com ([209.85.221.68]:34976 "EHLO
        mail-wr1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1725999AbeKUS0Q (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 21 Nov 2018 13:26:16 -0500
Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id 96so4578227wrb.2
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 23:52:49 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181120.091640.1759508282843765424.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 06:16:40PM CET, davem@davemloft.net wrote:
>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
>Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 08:39:12 +0100
>
>> If later on the netfilter code will use it, through another
>> ndo/notifier/whatever, that is side a nice side-effect in my
>> opinion.
>
>Netfilter HW offloading is the main motivation of these changes.
>
>You can try to spin it any way you like, but I think this is pretty
>clear.
>
>Would the author of these changes be even be remotely interested in
>this "cleanup" in areas of code he has never been involved in if that
>were not the case?

No, but of course. I'm just saying that the cleanup is nice and handy
even if the code would never be used by netfilter. Therefore I think
the info is irrelevant for the review. Anyway, I get your point.


>
>I think it is very dishonest to portray the situation differently.
>
>Thank you.