On 16-09-27 04:07 AM, Shmulik Ladkani wrote:
Hi David,
On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 01:56:06 -0400 (EDT), da...@davemloft.net wrote:
The discussion on this patch has ventured off into what to do about
recursion.
But it unclear to me where this specific patch, and this series,
stands right now. Someone please clear this up for me.
Status:
- Series adds "ingress redirect/mirror" support
- Positive feedback for the feature
- So far no comments regarding code itself
- Questions raised regarding "recursion handling"
>
Expressed that existing mirred code (i.e egress redirect) is *already*
loop-unsafe (and also, some non-tc netdev constructs, as exampled by
others).
Discussion then wandered to "recursion handling".
not totaly bike-shed discussion; legit issues are being raised
(and the egress issue you point out is fixable now that we are paying
attention to it).
We need to take care of loops. I pointed to how the original thought
process was. I _dont_ see this as resolvable via recursion handling
since this is per-skb and not per entry point.
You can add my Acked-by if you promise to take care of this issue next.
cheers,
jamal
PS:- the code looks straight forward
