From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [RFC]: xfrm by mark Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:35:25 +0100 Message-ID: <4B702F3D.3080104@trash.net> References: <1265567522.3688.27.camel@bigi> <4B701204.6000106@trash.net> <1265641110.3688.45.camel@bigi> <4B702711.6080800@trash.net> <1265642914.3688.71.camel@bigi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Herbert Xu , David Miller , =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Timo_Ter=E4s?= , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: hadi@cyberus.ca Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:37078 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752369Ab0BHPf3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2010 10:35:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1265642914.3688.71.camel@bigi> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 16:00 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >> I'd prefer masks since the mark size is pretty small and its already >> quite complicated to fit everything in 32 bit in complex setups. >> We also support masks everywhere else (I believe) for mark values >> nowadays. > > I could still use the mask also as it is consistently > being used today i.e (mark & x->mask) == x->mark > the only challenge i can think of is operational. How > do you see me activating the use of these marks? The setups > i see: > > -By default if i use pfkey or old iproute2 i can have both > mask and val as 0. no problem there.. > -If i was to insert table entries with say mark val 4 and mask > of 0, that would continue to work since mark is ignored. > -if at some later point i want to use this mark 4, do i just change > the mask? That may not scale well if you have a gazillion entries. > If i used a sysctl all i would do is just turn on the > syctl and the check becomes: > syctl_use_mark && ((mark & x->mask) == x->mark) Why would you want to insert entries with a mark and not use them immediately? We don't support this anywhere without replacing entries.