From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A743C4363D for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:58:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F73206CA for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:58:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388176AbgJBO6i (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:58:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58982 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387893AbgJBO6i (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:58:38 -0400 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:4433::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C261C0613D0 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 07:58:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kOMW4-00FIVM-5W; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 16:58:36 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] genetlink: support per-command policy dump From: Johannes Berg To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, andrew@lunn.ch, jiri@resnulli.us, mkubecek@suse.cz, dsahern@kernel.org, pablo@netfilter.org Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2020 16:58:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20201002075538.2a52dccb@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> References: <20201001225933.1373426-1-kuba@kernel.org> <20201001173644.74ed67da@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <20201002074001.3484568a@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <1dacbe07dc89cd69342199e61aeead4475f3621c.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20201002075538.2a52dccb@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.5 (3.36.5-1.fc32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org > > Or just give them both? I mean, in many (most?) cases they're anyway > > going to be the same, so with the patches I posted you could just give > > them the two different policy indexes, and they can be the same? > > Ah, I missed your posting! Huh, I even CC'ed you I think? https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20201002090944.195891-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net/t/#u and userspace: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20201002102609.224150-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net/t/#u > Like this? > > [OP_POLICY] > [OP] > [DO] -> u32 > [DUMP] -> u32 Yeah, that'd work. I'd probably wonder if we shouldn't do [OP_POLICY] [OP] -> (u32, u32) in a struct with two u32's, since that's quite a bit more compact. I did only: [OP_POLICY] [OP] -> u32 johannes