netdev - Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] tests: fix reference output for meter offload stats

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: <CAM0EoMkFhGtT5t0103V=h0YVddBrkwiAngP7BZY-vStijUVvtw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Oct 2022 10:40:30 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org>
Cc:     Marcelo Leitner <mleitner@...hat.com>,
        Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>,
        Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@...hat.com>,
        Tianyu Yuan <tianyu.yuan@...igine.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>, dev@...nvswitch.org,
        oss-drivers <oss-drivers@...igine.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Oz Shlomo <ozsh@...dia.com>, Paul Blakey <paulb@...dia.com>,
        Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] tests: fix reference output for meter offload stats

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:00 AM Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org> wrote:
>

[..]
> > I thought it was pipe but maybe it is OK(in my opinion that is a bad code
> > for just "count"). We have some (at least NIC) hardware folks on the list.
>
> IIRC, 'OK' action will stop the processing for the packet, so it can
> only be used as a last action in the list.  But we need to count packets
> as a very first action in the list.  So, that doesn't help.
>

That's why i said it is a bad code - but i believe it's what some of
the hardware
people are doing. Note: it's only bad if you have more actions after because
it aborts the processing pipeline.

> > Note: we could create an alias to PIPE and call it COUNT if it helps.
>
> Will that help with offloading of that action?  Why the PIPE is not
> offloadable in the first place and will COUNT be offloadable?

Offloadable is just a semantic choice in this case. If someone is
using OK to count  today - they could should be able to use PIPE
instead (their driver needs to do some transformation of course).

cheers,
jamal