[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171031104641.GI1972@nanopsycho.orion>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:46:41 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
Cc: "Nambiar, Amritha" <amritha.nambiar@...el.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
Ganesh Goudar <ganeshgr@...lsio.com>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>, idosch@...lanox.com,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>,
pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com, john.hurley@...ronome.com,
"Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 00/20] net: sched: convert cls ndo_setup_tc
offload calls to per-block callbacks
Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 08:26:25AM CET, jiri@...nulli.us wrote:
>Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 07:17:24PM CEST, kubakici@...pl wrote:
>>On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 10:43:51 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 09:53:21AM CEST, kubakici@...pl wrote:
>>> >On Sat, 28 Oct 2017 09:20:31 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> >> Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 02:52:00AM CEST, kubakici@...pl wrote:
>>> >> >On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 09:27:30 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> >> >> Yes, it is the same.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >FWIW I also see what Amritha and Alex are describing here, for cls_bpf
>>> >> >there are no DESTROYs coming on rmmod or qdisc del. There is a DESTROY
>>> >> >if I manually remove the filter (or if an ADD with skip_sw fails).
>>> >>
>>> >> Is this different to the original behaviour? Just for cls_bpf?
>>> >
>>> >For cls_bpf the callbacks used to be 100% symmetrical, i.e. destroy
>>> >would always be guaranteed if add succeeded (regardless of state of
>>> >skip_* flags).
>>>
>>> Hmm. It still should be symmetrical. Looking at following path:
>>> cls_bpf_destroy->
>>> __cls_bpf_delete->
>>> cls_bpf_stop_offload->
>>> cls_bpf_offload_cmd(tp, prog, TC_CLSBPF_DESTROY)
>>>
>>> I don't see how any tp could be missed. Could you please check this
>>> callpath is utilized during your action (rmmod or qdisc del)?
>>
>>The same path seems to be utilized but the unbind comes before the
>>filters are destroyed.
>
>Ah, will fix. Thanks!
We need to move tcf_block_offload_unbind(block, q, ei); call after the
chains are flushed. There are big waves around this code in net and
net-next atm. Will send a patch fix this once the storm is over.
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists