lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <468bb089-e263-47bb-eaf8-1a65b2575092@mojatatu.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 05:24:10 -0400 From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, yotamg@...lanox.com, eladr@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com, nogahf@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com Subject: Re: [patch net-next 0/9] mlxsw: implement port mirroring offload On 16-07-21 05:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:00:33AM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote: >> On 16-07-21 04:19 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com> >>> [..] > >> infrastructure. If answer is yes, thencould we have used >> a classifier like u32 here? >> i.e something like: >> tc filter add dev eth25 xxxx protocol all \ >> u32 match u32 0 0 \ >> action mirred ... > > That could be used. But I believe it is nicer to have explicit match-all > classifier for this case. That puts nice limit to what could be matched. > Iam indifferent. If you are planning to use u32 for ACL then it would make sense to support span + ACL with the same classifier. > Could you point to that? checkpatch.pl does not say anything and I also > don't see anything. > scripts/Lindent (but you need to be a little careful with it) Generally the coding style guide in Documentation is sufficient. cheers, jamal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists