Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 05:49:27PM CET, a...@vadai.me wrote: >On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 03:47:19PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 03:24:43PM CET, a...@vadai.me wrote: >> >This patch is based on a patch made by John Fastabend. >> >It adds support for offloading cls_flower. >> >A filter that is offloaded successfuly by hardware, will not be added to >> >the hashtable and won't be processed by software. >> >> That is wrong. User should explitly specify to not include rule into sw >> by SKIP_KERNEL flag (does not exist now, with John's recent patch we'll >> have only SKIP_HW). Please add that in this patchset. >Why? If a rule is offloaded, why would the user want to reprocess it by >software? >If the user use SKIP_HW, it will be processed by SW. Else, the user >would want it to be processed by HW or fallback to SW. I don't >understand in which case the user would like to have it done twice.
For example if you turn on the offloading by unsetting NETIF_F_HW_TC. Or if someone inserts skbs into rx path directly, for example pktgen. We need SKIP_KERNEL to be set by user, not implicit.
