From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26C78C4332F for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 14:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232072AbiLLOWO (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:22:14 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44648 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232519AbiLLOWJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:22:09 -0500 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.154.123]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FF767644; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:22:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1670854928; x=1702390928; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=7a2DuvLenxyuI7AqD6mHvsidXY3Z0leJSqLMjOih4cw=; b=pl1+vsAMMs6/WcKrDFHue+AmtjhguDtJTVl4r9KGCucLIHT5xNxF9Meb kAiEp7lGelhVJDbsFu2C6Z+WZx76jC7HbMamab17Oi01OSijt0sav2Dhu hAz9QfPOSHEXp7qp+Ly9VTBQYljqFPZTuJYO+R6/uTVikwmxFtSPf9tVZ 9jq0RnGb6Cgog+uENiLQOdOk7nQPuvv/Z0+DrW+LiftkXPX3kHi/TqZZF iSTZwKOT1K1uDzT9UnAH0pYDhW21kQSVXiX8joqCOwH6zXV0CLOPCvhLl RN1aToSPBa0SGBueSkZcnX1w2DRY1P2JTKnpg4456Kg5QPACG8i0ATXYm w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,238,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="191236976" Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa2.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA256; 12 Dec 2022 07:22:07 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) by chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.16; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 07:22:04 -0700 Received: from localhost (10.10.115.15) by chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.2507.16 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 07:22:04 -0700 Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:27:12 +0100 From: Horatiu Vultur To: Jakub Kicinski CC: Vladimir Oltean , Michael Walle , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/4] net: lan966x: Add ptp trap rules Message-ID: <20221212142712.majhp4yifg72y3b2@soft-dev3-1> References: <20221209125857.yhsqt4nj5kmavhmc@soft-dev3-1> <20221209125611.m5cp3depjigs7452@skbuf> <20221209142058.ww7aijhsr76y3h2t@soft-dev3-1> <20221209144328.m54ksmoeitmcjo5f@skbuf> <20221209145720.ahjmercylzqo5tla@soft-dev3-1> <20221209145637.nr6favnsofmwo45s@skbuf> <20221209153010.f4r577ilnlein77e@soft-dev3-1> <20221209152713.qmbnovdookrmzvkx@skbuf> <20221209150332.79a921fd@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221209150332.79a921fd@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org The 12/09/2022 15:03, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 17:27:13 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > > So for example, on a fresh started lan966x the user will add the following > > > rule: > > > tc filter add dev eth0 ingress chain 8000000 prio 1 handle 1 protocol > > > all flower skip_sw dst_mac 00:11:22:33:44:55/ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff action > > > trap action goto chain 8100000 > > > > > > He expects this rule not to be hit as there is no rule in chain 0. Now if > > > PTP is started and it would enable vcap, then suddenly this rule may be > > > hit. > > > > Is it too restrictive to only allow adding offloaded filters to a chain > > that has a valid goto towards it, coming (perhaps indirectly) from chain 0? > > Right, we fumbled the review and let the chain oddness in. > Until recently the driver worked without any rules in chain 0 :( > > Maybe adding and offload of the rules can be separated? > Only actually add the rules to the HW once the goto chain rule > has been added? Yes, we would like to do something like this. -- /Horatiu