From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: roopa Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/4] switchdev: don't support custom ip rules, for now Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:09:32 -0800 Message-ID: <54F4B56C.5040709@cumulusnetworks.com> References: <1425290777-22702-1-git-send-email-sfeldma@gmail.com> <1425290777-22702-5-git-send-email-sfeldma@gmail.com> <54F4755F.6020205@cumulusnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Netdev , "David S. Miller" , =?UTF-8?B?SmnFmcOtIFDDrXJrbw==?= To: Scott Feldman Return-path: Received: from mail-pd0-f173.google.com ([209.85.192.173]:37661 "EHLO mail-pd0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753037AbbCBTJe (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2015 14:09:34 -0500 Received: by pdbnh10 with SMTP id nh10so15928671pdb.4 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:09:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/2/15, 9:00 AM, Scott Feldman wrote: > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 6:36 AM, roopa wrote: >> On 3/2/15, 2:06 AM, sfeldma@gmail.com wrote: >>> From: Scott Feldman >>> >>> Keep switchdev FIB offload model simple for now and don't allow custom ip >>> rules. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Scott Feldman >> >> I don't see a need to do this. And seems very aggressive. >> Also, note that the rules in a system can be on non-hw accelerated ports. > It is aggressive but it's the safest choice for the first pass on this > L3 offload. Without, switchdev has no way to model custom ip rules > down to hardware. Let's start with this aggressive case, and that'll > force us to work on relaxing it. > > But, this will not allow hw acceleration of routes even if you had a rule for the management traffic for example.