netdev - Re: [v3,net-next 1/4] net: qos: introduce a gate control flow action

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: <20200423191131.c257srsnicyrhol6@ws.localdomain>
Date:   Thu, 23 Apr 2020 21:11:31 +0200
From:   "Allan W. Nielsen" <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
CC:     Po Liu <Po.Liu@....com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Vinicius Costa Gomes" <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        Alexandru Marginean <alexandru.marginean@....com>,
        <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, <vishal@...lsio.com>,
        <saeedm@...lanox.com>, <leon@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        <simon.horman@...ronome.com>, <pablo@...filter.org>,
        <moshe@...lanox.com>, Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>,
        Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [v3,net-next 1/4] net: qos: introduce a gate control flow action

On 22.04.2020 22:28, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>> >> tc qdisc add dev eth0 ingress
>> >
>> >> tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip \
>> >           flower src_ip 192.168.0.20 \
>> >           action gate index 2 clockid CLOCK_TAI \
>> >           sched-entry open 200000000 -1 8000000 \
>> >           sched-entry close 100000000 -1 -1
>>
>> First of all, it is a long time since I read the 802.1Qci and when I did
>> it, it was a draft. So please let me know if I'm completly off here.
>>
>> I know you are focusing on the gate control in this patch serie, but I
>> assume that you later will want to do the policing and flow-meter as
>> well. And it could make sense to consider how all of this work
>> toghether.
>>
>> A common use-case for the policing is to have multiple rules pointing at
>> the same policing instance. Maybe you want the sum of the traffic on 2
>> ports to be limited to 100mbit. If you specify such action on the
>> individual rule (like done with the gate), then you can not have two
>> rules pointing at the same policer instance.
>>
>> Long storry short, have you considered if it would be better to do
>> something like:
>>
>>    tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip \
>>             flower src_ip 192.168.0.20 \
>>             action psfp-id 42
>>
>> And then have some other function to configure the properties of psfp-id
>> 42?
>>
>>
>> /Allan
>>
>
>It is very good that you brought it up though, since in my opinion too
>it is a rather important aspect, and it seems that the fact this
>feature is already designed-in was a bit too subtle.
>
>"psfp-id" is actually his "index" argument.
Ahh.. Thanks for clarifying, I missed this point completly.