netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/2] flow_offload hardware priority fixes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20190806094219.uwpjjsqkpf5rdi6d@salvia>
Date:   Tue, 6 Aug 2019 11:42:19 +0200
From:   Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, marcelo.leitner@...il.com,
        jiri@...nulli.us, wenxu@...oud.cn, saeedm@...lanox.com,
        paulb@...lanox.com, gerlitz.or@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] flow_offload hardware priority fixes

On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 12:04:39PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 09:08:54 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > The idea is that every subsystem (ethtool, tc, nf) sets up/binds its
> > own flow_block object. And each flow_block object has its own priority
> > range space. So whatever priority the user specifies only applies to
> > the specific subsystem.
> 
> Right, okay so that part is pretty obvious but thanks for spelling it
> out. 
> 
> Are you also agreeing that priorities of blocks, not rules within 
> a block are dictated by the order of processing within the kernel?
> IOW TC blocks are _always_ before nft blocks?

yes.