[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200623070120.GA575172@splinter>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 10:01:20 +0300
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To: Po Liu <po.liu@....com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us, vinicius.gomes@...el.com,
vlad@...lov.dev, claudiu.manoil@....com, vladimir.oltean@....com,
alexandru.marginean@....com, michael.chan@...adcom.com,
vishal@...lsio.com, saeedm@...lanox.com, leon@...nel.org,
jiri@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
kuba@...nel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
simon.horman@...ronome.com, pablo@...filter.org,
moshe@...lanox.com, m-karicheri2@...com,
andre.guedes@...ux.intel.com, stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: Re: [v1,net-next 1/4] net: qos: add tc police offloading action with
max frame size limit
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 02:34:09PM +0800, Po Liu wrote:
> From: Po Liu <Po.Liu@....com>
>
> Current police offloading support the 'burst'' and 'rate_bytes_ps'. Some
s/support/supports/
s/'burst''/'burst'/
> hardware own the capability to limit the frame size. If the frame size
> larger than the setting, the frame would be dropped. For the police
> action itself already accept the 'mtu' parameter in tc command. But not
s/accept/accepts/
> extend to tc flower offloading. So extend 'mtu' to tc flower offloading.
Throughout the submission you are always using the term 'flower
offloading', but this has nothing to do with flower. Flower is the
classifier, whereas you are extending police action which can be tied to
any classifier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Po Liu <Po.Liu@....com>
> ---
> continue the thread 20200306125608.11717-7-Po.Liu@....com for the police
> action offloading.
For a patch set you need a cover letter (patch 0). It should include
necessary background, motivation and overview of the patches. You can
mention there that some of the patches were sent as RFC back in March
and provide a link:
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200306125608.11717-1-Po.Liu@nxp.com/
The code itself looks good to me.
>
> include/net/flow_offload.h | 1 +
> include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h | 10 ++++++++++
> net/sched/cls_api.c | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/flow_offload.h b/include/net/flow_offload.h
> index 00c15f14c434..c2ef19c6b27d 100644
> --- a/include/net/flow_offload.h
> +++ b/include/net/flow_offload.h
> @@ -234,6 +234,7 @@ struct flow_action_entry {
> struct { /* FLOW_ACTION_POLICE */
> s64 burst;
> u64 rate_bytes_ps;
> + u32 mtu;
> } police;
> struct { /* FLOW_ACTION_CT */
> int action;
> diff --git a/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h b/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h
> index f098ad4424be..cd973b10ae8c 100644
> --- a/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h
> +++ b/include/net/tc_act/tc_police.h
> @@ -69,4 +69,14 @@ static inline s64 tcf_police_tcfp_burst(const struct tc_action *act)
> return params->tcfp_burst;
> }
>
> +static inline u32 tcf_police_tcfp_mtu(const struct tc_action *act)
> +{
> + struct tcf_police *police = to_police(act);
> + struct tcf_police_params *params;
> +
> + params = rcu_dereference_protected(police->params,
> + lockdep_is_held(&police->tcf_lock));
> + return params->tcfp_mtu;
> +}
> +
> #endif /* __NET_TC_POLICE_H */
> diff --git a/net/sched/cls_api.c b/net/sched/cls_api.c
> index a00a203b2ef5..6aba7d5ba1ec 100644
> --- a/net/sched/cls_api.c
> +++ b/net/sched/cls_api.c
> @@ -3658,6 +3658,7 @@ int tc_setup_flow_action(struct flow_action *flow_action,
> entry->police.burst = tcf_police_tcfp_burst(act);
> entry->police.rate_bytes_ps =
> tcf_police_rate_bytes_ps(act);
> + entry->police.mtu = tcf_police_tcfp_mtu(act);
> } else if (is_tcf_ct(act)) {
> entry->id = FLOW_ACTION_CT;
> entry->ct.action = tcf_ct_action(act);
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists