Wed, Nov 01, 2017 at 11:25:02AM CET, dan...@iogearbox.net wrote: >On 11/01/2017 03:12 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 04:12:22PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> > From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com> >[...] >> I don't think it's great, but I don't have any suggestions on >> how to avoid it, so I'm not objecting. Just disappointed that >> you keep adding stuff to tc and messing with sw fast path only to >> make parity with some obscure hw feature. > >tc became a sink for that over time.
Block sharing is not only useful for offloads. But I understand. > >> If it keeps going like this we'd need to come up with some new fast >> hook for clsbpf in ingress/egress paths. We use it for >> every packet, so extra loads are not great. >> I guess they should be cache hits, but will take extra cache line. >> All of the bugs in tc logic recently are not comforting either. > >+1 I don't see any effect of tc changes on clsbpf ingress/egress since clsact was introduced. Could you point it out?
