Hi Davide,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Davide Caratti <[email protected]> > Sent: 2020年5月6日 20:54 > To: Po Liu <[email protected]>; [email protected]; linux- > [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; Claudiu Manoil > <[email protected]>; Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]>; > Alexandru Marginean <[email protected]> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [v4,iproute2-next 1/2] iproute2-next:tc:action: add a > gate control action > > Caution: EXT Email > > On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 16:40 +0800, Po Liu wrote: > > Introduce a ingress frame gate control flow action. > [...] > > hello Po Liu, > > [...] > > > +create_entry: > > + e = create_gate_entry(gate_state, interval, > > + ipv, maxoctets); > > + if (!e) { > > + fprintf(stderr, "gate: not enough memory\n"); > > + free_entries(&gate_entries); > > + return -1; > > + } > > + > > + list_add_tail(&e->list, &gate_entries); > > + entry_num++; > > + > > + } else if (matches(*argv, "reclassify") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "drop") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "shot") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "continue") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "pass") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "ok") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "pipe") == 0 || > > + matches(*argv, "goto") == 0) { > > + if (parse_action_control(&argc, &argv, > > + &parm.action, false)) { > > + free_entries(&gate_entries); > > + return -1; > > + } > > + } else if (matches(*argv, "help") == 0) { > > + usage(); > > + } else { > > + break; > > + } > > + > > + argc--; > > + argv++; > > + } > > + > > + parse_action_control_dflt(&argc, &argv, &parm.action, > > + false, TC_ACT_PIPE); > > it seems that the control action is parsed twice, and the first time it does > not allow "jump" and "trap". Is that intentional? IOW, are there some > "act_gate" configurations that don't allow jump or trap? It is allowed to jump and trap. I didn't notice it was loaded twice. I would correct here and remove one parse_action_control() Thanks a lot! > > I don't see anything similar in kernel act_gate.c, where tcf_gate_act() can > return TC_ACT_SHOT or whatever is written in parm.action. That's why I'm > asking, if these two control actions are forbidden you should let the kernel > return -EINVAL with a proper extack in tcf_gate_init(). Can you please > clarify? > > thank you in advance! > -- > davide > Br, Po Liu
