On 10/19/22 10:12, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:40:30AM -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:00 AM Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@ovn.org> wrote: >>> >> >> [..] >>>> I thought it was pipe but maybe it is OK(in my opinion that is a bad code >>>> for just "count"). We have some (at least NIC) hardware folks on the list. >>> >>> IIRC, 'OK' action will stop the processing for the packet, so it can >>> only be used as a last action in the list. But we need to count packets >>> as a very first action in the list. So, that doesn't help. >>> >> >> That's why i said it is a bad code - but i believe it's what some of >> the hardware >> people are doing. Note: it's only bad if you have more actions after because >> it aborts the processing pipeline. >> >>>> Note: we could create an alias to PIPE and call it COUNT if it helps. >>> >>> Will that help with offloading of that action? Why the PIPE is not >>> offloadable in the first place and will COUNT be offloadable? >> >> Offloadable is just a semantic choice in this case. If someone is >> using OK to count today - they could should be able to use PIPE >> instead (their driver needs to do some transformation of course). > > FWIIW, yes, that is my thinking too.
I don't know that code well, but I thought that tcf_gact_offload_act_setup() is a generic function. And since it explicitly forbids offload of PIPE action, no drivers can actually offload it even if they want to. So it's not really a driver's choice in the current kernel code. Or am I missing something? Best regards, Ilya Maximets. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
