From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 1/2] net sched actions: dump more than TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO actions per batch Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:42:04 -0400 Message-ID: <2d2ffc6d-56e4-3818-36f1-78113f24d580@mojatatu.com> References: <1492693582-26810-1-git-send-email-jhs@emojatatu.com> <1492693582-26810-2-git-send-email-jhs@emojatatu.com> <20170420135915.GE1886@nanopsycho.orion> <20170420142453.GF1886@nanopsycho.orion> <20170424091455.GA25218@vergenet.net> <2ca4266f-a164-d2ad-37fa-45f7ae354eb8@mojatatu.com> <20170424142058.GA26625@salvia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Simon Horman , Jiri Pirko , davem@davemloft.net, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tom Herbert To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Received: from mail-it0-f65.google.com ([209.85.214.65]:34132 "EHLO mail-it0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1172832AbdDXOmH (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:42:07 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f65.google.com with SMTP id c26so9769152itd.1 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 07:42:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170424142058.GA26625@salvia> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 17-04-24 10:20 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 08:49:00AM -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> >> I am fine with the counter-Postel view of having the kernel >> validate that appropriate bits are set as long as we dont make >> user space to now start learning how to play acrobatics. > > jamal, what performance concern you have in building this error > message? TLVs is the most flexible way. And this is error path, so we > should build this message rarely, only if the user sends us something > incorrect, why bother... I have a feeling we are reffering to 2 different things. Which error message? Are you talking about extended ACK? I have no problem with that. Let me sumarize for you the discussion. My concern was was the double request needed now which was unneeded before. Before: You send a msg and say the kernel didnt understand. Kernel ignores what it didnt understand and does things you asked it to. i.e Part of Postel principle which says "Be liberal in what you expect of others" But the new concern is user space not abiding to the other half of Postel principle "Be conservative in what you send". It may set some random flags which the kernel doesnt understand. One idea is to have the kernel totally reject anytime it sees such flags. I am sure such a message could be conveyed back to the user. Then the user sends the correct one back. The challenge i have is to enforce this trial by fire approach to all user space apps. It is a large change. My suggestion is for user to set flag to request the old behavior of sending only one message. cheers, jamal