Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:04:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from b.mx.projectdream.org (eth0-0.arisu.projectdream.org [194.158.4.191])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iBUE4Eja003659
	for <netdev@oss.sgi.com>; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 06:04:35 -0800
Received: from postel.suug.ch (unknown [195.134.158.23])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by b.mx.projectdream.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD434F;
	Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:08:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: by postel.suug.ch (Postfix, from userid 10001)
	id DC6691C0EA; Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:09:29 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:09:29 +0100
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
To: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
        netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] PKT_SCHED: tc filter extension API
Message-ID: <20041230140929.GY32419@postel.suug.ch>
References: <20041230122652.GM32419@postel.suug.ch> <20041230123023.GO32419@postel.suug.ch> <1104414713.1047.130.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1104414713.1047.130.camel@jzny.localdomain>
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/638/Tue Dec 21 14:41:34 2004
	clamav-milter version 0.80j
	on 127.0.0.1
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-archive-position: 13243
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com
X-original-sender: tgraf@suug.ch
Precedence: bulk
X-list: netdev

* jamal <1104414713.1047.130.camel@jzny.localdomain> 2004-12-30 08:51
> In current code you can have CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT and not use new
> style policer, rather use old one i.e CONFIG_NET_CLS_POLICE. You seem to
> indicate presence of CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT implies absence of
> NET_CLS_POLICE.

Is this wrong? Current code: (u32)

2004/06/15 hadi       | #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT
2004/06/15 hadi       | 	struct tc_action	*action;
2004/06/15 hadi       | #else
2002/02/05 torvalds   | #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS_POLICE
2002/02/05 torvalds   | 	struct tcf_police	*police;
2002/02/05 torvalds   | #endif
2004/06/15 hadi       | #endif

> config NET_CLS_POLICE
>         ...
>         depends on NET_CLS && NET_QOS && NET_ACT_POLICE!=y &&  
> NET_ACT_POLICE!=m

Hmm... doesn't make too much sense for me. What's the advantage of
allowing this mix?