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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, 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 B3AF9C3A59B for ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 18:24:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B50A21019 for ; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 18:24:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="CWGpTz2+" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726294AbfHQSYZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Aug 2019 14:24:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f172.google.com ([209.85.214.172]:40864 "EHLO mail-pl1-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726046AbfHQSYZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Aug 2019 14:24:25 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f172.google.com with SMTP id h3so440123pls.7; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 11:24:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ChyHBGIA+t8HHZ8fjN+eZZX89DxnxMH1aUXinF6wiX8=; b=CWGpTz2+Kce16DRmUO/jFzSJe3WGQ96RREy4aTkTsTuVqHqQ87tvxcxU4KOiMDYdFt XriNb+8VEE4C0sObeH36vyFboMPwZnl7k1/KsZtBmJuQVclQcm91hnpT3X554q4XYmYU lGiZ0+gegS6xUNmS27Sor+eyACUmAJkmwTc2nLNPmqaNhHB/hCZMR6YMHsEGW2VbnQJ6 hhttkt0vv7FUz5+a0Nyu9bwdQ+k4kESZ8TYKQkPEN0LQnqp+m9xk1/M017UmR6jtDMS3 GPfm/trqEYTQS6SLn/z4OuZ1X9s8do2BIEGJkWPufQmH6fKVmtbiIzhLi4yNRGCdAeAG 3UoQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ChyHBGIA+t8HHZ8fjN+eZZX89DxnxMH1aUXinF6wiX8=; b=MdtErWUVYq/g0iXIM0aZYzw1C2KUD53Pwa3OUfM1XsTQE0w2fhAJmgMi05eBW9ZhFN IiHdcyW7ce/4Nfpp8Tec/aJ/uhY7Yz/pJmHedSgtvDhItW3uS67uxbGJm6INH+2aJfJ2 Y/ZqZ0FWBF+s+5ri1vtm8ThODOkABHMy1HWtue02mP/0KOW7M/d1HhvJFThCVgHTdfdz u0BFoW+eNc113hPeVEY3Tw7Na2dN2G22Yim+1b7skufui8yMb+HQ5Pdnd4UeFvMxLbnn r0B4KNUeImc3jQwA6lysHMmayUv/HUbmQE9LqgWbJQMiMgvfqupG24kbEJZeS2fSGhbt zU1A== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWzK9ISvG+/hJzU4LvISo+QynUXijn6iOOeeTl4JFairPiZ+qXA peXBIlBy8j146JwJ8hPg9wr5TDZ+zuEF/orbH7bPQg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzgr7bPKeOp+oPpw+bieCQE/gQng0l173PxZmamuwodfUO57xHUDUAl0sCyN2qsf9k5Fdt9dWM8wn4yaMG4ZJw= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7286:: with SMTP id d6mr15082675pll.61.1566066264315; Sat, 17 Aug 2019 11:24:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Cong Wang Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 11:24:13 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Unable to create htb tc classes more than 64K To: Akshat Kakkar Cc: NetFilter , lartc , netdev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 5:46 AM Akshat Kakkar wrote: > > I agree that it is because of 16bit of minor I'd of class which > restricts it to 64K. > Point is, can we use multilevel qdisc and classes to extend it to more > no. of classes i.e. to more than 64K classes If your goal is merely having as many classes as you can, then yes. > > One scheme can be like > 100: root qdisc > | > / | \ > / | \ > / | \ > / | \ > 100:1 100:2 100:3 child classes > | | | > | | | > | | | > 1: 2: 3: qdisc > / \ / \ / \ > / \ / \ > 1:1 1:2 3:1 3:2 leaf classes > > with all qdisc and classes defined as htb. > > Is this correct approach? Any alternative?? Again, depends on what your goal is. > > Besides, in order to direct traffic to leaf classes 1:1, 1:2, 2:1, > 2:2, 3:1, 3:2 .... , instead of using filters I am using ipset with > skbprio and iptables map-set match rule. > But even after all this it don't work. Why? Again, the filters you use to classify the packets could only work for the classes on the same level, no the next level. Thanks.