From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/5] act_mirred: use TC_ACT_REINJECT when
 possible
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 12:14:32 +0200
Message-ID: <3b2edafe358d1015a143b1fa0cf49b180e962c88.camel@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1532437050.git.pabeni@redhat.com>
         <612f6fb5b0cdddcbbc2d99f65b148b7f3b8b9a27.1532437050.git.pabeni@redhat.com>
         <CAM_iQpUiH5gdPp_=GKhP7N8Eu2VVjmGfR6hvXQoaKwyot0JkjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>,
        Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@gmail.com>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:57974 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1728679AbeGYLZf (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 25 Jul 2018 07:25:35 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpUiH5gdPp_=GKhP7N8Eu2VVjmGfR6hvXQoaKwyot0JkjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 2018-07-24 at 14:15 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 1:07 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
> > +
> > +               /* let's the caller reinject the packet, if possible */
> > +               if (skb_at_tc_ingress(skb)) {
> > +                       res->ingress = want_ingress;
> > +                       res->qstats = this_cpu_ptr(m->common.cpu_qstats);
> > +                       return TC_ACT_REINJECT;
> > +               }
> 
> Looks good to me, but here we no longer return user-specified
> return value here, I am sure it is safe for TC_ACT_STOLEN, but
> I am not sure if it is safe for other values, like TC_ACT_RECLASSIFY.

I can make it safer, using the no clone path only if tcf_action is
TC_ACT_STOLEN. That will still cover the relevant use-cases.

Will do that in v4.

Cheers,

Paolo