On 18-01-06 03:43 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
@@ -886,8 +887,13 @@ static int tcf_fill_node(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *skb, tcm->tcm_family = AF_UNSPEC; tcm->tcm__pad1 = 0; tcm->tcm__pad2 = 0; - tcm->tcm_ifindex = qdisc_dev(q)->ifindex; - tcm->tcm_parent = parent; + if (q) { + tcm->tcm_ifindex = qdisc_dev(q)->ifindex; + tcm->tcm_parent = parent; + } else { + tcm->tcm_ifindex = 0; /* block index is stored in parent */ + tcm->tcm_parent = block->index; + }Please guys, please look at this reuse (also on clt side). I would like you to double-check this reuse of existing API for balock_index carrying purpose. I believe it's UAPI safe. But please, check it out carefully.
Should not break any ABI/UAPI AFAIK. Maybe go for a negative ifindex (not sure if zero means something speacial to someone). cheers, jamal
