netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] net/sched: act_ct: Add support for specifying tuple offload policy

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]

Date:   Thu, 14 May 2020 16:49:38 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc:     Paul Blakey <paulb@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Oz Shlomo <ozsh@...lanox.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>, Roi Dayan <roid@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] net/sched: act_ct: Add support for
 specifying tuple offload policy

Thu, May 14, 2020 at 04:04:02PM CEST, ecree@...arflare.com wrote:
>On 14/05/2020 14:48, Paul Blakey wrote:
>> To avoid conflicting policies, the policy is applied per zone on the first
>> act ct instance for that zone, and must be repeated in all further act ct
>> instances of the same zone.
>Is the scope of this the entire zone, or just offload of that zone to a
> specific device?
>Either way, the need to repeat the policy on every tc command suggests
> that there really ought to instead be a separate API for configuring
> conntrack offload policy, either per zone or per (zone, device) pair,
> as appropriate.

You don't have to repeat. You specify it in the first one, in the rest
you omit it.


>
>-ed