[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zmm5e3KFxFCQzwzt@dcaratti.users.ipa.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 17:06:35 +0200
From: Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>
To: Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@...erby.net>
Cc: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org>, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/9] flower: rework TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS
usage
hi Asbjørn, thanks for the patch!
On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 11:53:33PM +0000, Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen wrote:
> This series reworks the recently added TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_FLAGS
> attribute, to be more like TCA_FLOWER_KEY_FLAGS, and use
> the unused u32 flags field in TCA_FLOWER_KEY_ENC_CONTROL,
> instead of adding another u32 in FLOW_DISSECTOR_KEY_ENC_FLAGS.
>
> I have defined the new FLOW_DIS_F_* and TCA_FLOWER_KEY_FLAGS_*
> flags to coexists for now, so the meaning of the flags field
> in struct flow_dissector_key_control is not depending on the
> context that it is used in. If we run out of bits then we can
> always make split them up later, if we really want to.
>
> Davide and Ilya would this work for you?
If you are ok with this, I can adjust the iproute code I keep locally,
and the kselftest, re-test, and than report back to the series total
reviewed-by.
It's going a take some days though; and of course, those bit will be
upstreamed as well.
WDYT?
> Currently this series is only compile-tested.
>
thanks,
--
davide
Powered by blists - more mailing lists