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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 16:30:09 -0400 From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> To: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>, Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>, Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, Vishal Kulkarni <vishal@...lsio.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 0/3] flow_offload: Re-add per-action statistics On 2019-05-15 3:39 p.m., Edward Cree wrote: [..] > > A point for discussion: would it be better if, instead of the tcfa_index > (for which the driver has to know the rules about which flow_action > types share a namespace), we had some kind of globally unique cookie? > In the same way that rule->cookie is really a pointer, could we use the > address of the TC-internal data structure representing the action? tcfa_index + action identifier seem to be sufficiently global, no? Then we dont have a mismatch with what the kernel(non-offloaded) semantics. Note: The kernel is free to generate the index (if the user doesnt specify). > Do > rules that share an action all point to the same struct tc_action in > their tcf_exts, for instance? Yes they do. cheers, jamal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists