From: Brian Haley <brian.haley@hpe.com>
To: Hong Hui Xiao <xiaohhui@cn.ibm.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Question/Bug] Should the priority of ip rule be unique?
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 18:01:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5694345D.4040809@hpe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201601080632.u086WOPd003565@d23av04.au.ibm.com>
On 01/08/2016 01:32 AM, Hong Hui Xiao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From the man page of ip rule at [1], it says that "Each rule should have
> an explicitly set unique priority value." It is reasonable to have unique
> priority for ambiguous rules.
> But I have a set of unambiguous ip rules, do I still need to set the
> priority of to be unique? In practice, I can set ip rules with duplicated
> priority, and things works as expected. I want to confirm with iproute
> developers if this is a support usecase. If so, the information in man
> page may need updates.
>
> 5000: from all fwmark 0x4000000/0xffff0000 lookup table0
> 5000: from all fwmark 0x4010000/0xffff0000 lookup table1
> 5000: from all fwmark 0x4020000/0xffff0000 lookup table2
> 5000: from all fwmark 0x4030000/0xffff0000 lookup table3
>
>
> [1] http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/ip-rule.8.html (search for
> "unique")
No, you shouldn't need to set the priority in this case as each rule is unique.
From reading earlier in the man page, and looking at the code, the rules are
ordered and scanned in order of decreasing priority, with a lower priority being
higher. In the case of rules with the same priority they are ordered based on
the order in which they were added to the kernel.
So I guess the man page could be tweaked a little, given "should" seems to
follow the liberal IANA meaning of recommended, but not required.
-Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-11 23:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-08 6:32 [Question/Bug] Should the priority of ip rule be unique? Hong Hui Xiao
2016-01-11 23:01 ` Brian Haley [this message]
2016-01-12 12:35 ` Hong Hui Xiao
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5694345D.4040809@hpe.com \
--to=brian.haley@hpe.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xiaohhui@cn.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).