[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180725170859.GC20383@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:09:00 -0300
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/5] net/tc: introduce TC_ACT_REINJECT.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 09:48:16AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:27 AM Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
> >
> > Those changes were there from the beginning (above patch did
> > not introduce them).
> > IIRC, the reason was to distinguish between policy intended
> > drops and drops because of errors.
>
> There must be a limit for "overlimit" to make sense. There is
> no limit in mirred action's context, probably there is only
> such a limit in act_police. So, all rest should not touch overlimit.
+1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists