netdev - Re: [patch net-next 0/9] mlxsw: implement port mirroring offload

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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