[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220822095327.00b4ebd5@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 09:53:27 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "huangguangbin (A)" <huangguangbin2@...wei.com>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, <idosch@...dia.com>,
<linux@...pel-privat.de>, <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<lipeng321@...wei.com>, <shenjian15@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: ethtool add VxLAN to the NFC API
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 22:46:14 +0800 huangguangbin (A) wrote:
> 1. I check the manual and implement of TC flower, it doesn't seems
> to support configuring flows steering to a specific queue.
We got an answer from Sridhar on that one (thanks!)
I know it was discussed so it's a SMOC.
> 2. Our hns3 driver has supported configuring some type of flows
> steering to a specific queue by ethtool -U command, many users
> have already use ethtool way.
> 3. In addition, if our driver supports TC flower to configure flows
> steering to a specific queue, can we allow user to simultaneously
> use TC flower and ethtool to configure flow rules? Could the rules
> configured by TC flower be queried by ethtool -u?
> If two ways can be existing, I think it is more complicated for
> driver to manage flow rules.
I understand your motivation and these are very valid points.
However, we have to draw the line somewhere. We have at least
three ways of configuring flow offloads (ethtool, nft, tc).
Supporting all of them is a lot of work for the drivers, leading
to a situation where there's no "standard Linux API" because each
vendor picks a slightly different approach :(
TC seems the most popular because of the OVS offload, so my preference
is to pick it over the other APIs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists