[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d0da012b-6dda-4fbe-bb20-5eb988bb4ccc@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 10:07:55 -0600
From: Dan Jurgens <danielj@...dia.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, jasowang@...hat.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, parav@...dia.com, shshitrit@...dia.com,
yohadt@...dia.com, xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com, eperezma@...hat.com,
jgg@...pe.ca, kevin.tian@...el.com, kuba@...nel.org, andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v11 11/12] virtio_net: Add support for TCP and
UDP ethtool rules
On 11/19/25 3:14 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 08:39:01AM -0600, Daniel Jurgens wrote:
>> @@ -7167,6 +7261,10 @@ static bool supported_flow_type(const struct ethtool_rx_flow_spec *fs)
>> case ETHER_FLOW:
>> case IP_USER_FLOW:
>> case IPV6_USER_FLOW:
>> + case TCP_V4_FLOW:
>> + case TCP_V6_FLOW:
>> + case UDP_V4_FLOW:
>> + case UDP_V6_FLOW:
>> return true;
>> }
>>
>
> it kinda looks like you are sending flow control rules to
> the device ignoring what it reported as supported through
> VIRTIO_NET_FF_SELECTOR_CAP
>
> Is that right?
>
> The spec does not say what happens in such a case.
>
> Parav what is your take? is the implication that driver
> must only send supported rules?
>
validate_classifier_selectors checks the classifier we built against the
caps reported.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists