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: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 19:58:44 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org> Cc: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Roi Dayan <roid@...dia.com>, Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>, Oz Shlomo <ozsh@...dia.com>, Baowen Zheng <baowen.zheng@...igine.com> Subject: Re: [net-next 06/15] net/mlx5e: TC, Support tc action api for police On Fri, 29 Jul 2022 17:51:05 +0100 Simon Horman wrote: > my reading of things is that the handling of offload of police (meter) > actions in flower rules by the mlx5 driver is such that it can handle > offloading actions by index - actions that it would now be possible > to add to hardware with this patch in place. > > My reasoning assumes that mlx5e_tc_add_flow_meter() is called to offload > police (meter) actions in flower rules. And that it calls > mlx5e_tc_meter_get(), which can find actions based on an index. > > I could, however, be mistaken as I have so much knowledge of the mlx5 > driver. And rather than dive deeper I wanted to respond as above - I am > mindful of the point we are in the development cycle. > > I would be happy to dive deeper into this as a mater of priority if > desired. Thank you! No very deep dives necessary from my perspective, just wanted for the authors of the action offload API to look over.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists