Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 03:30:40 -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 j0ABUZVD019263 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 03:30:35 -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 0195CF; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:30:04 +0100 (CET) Received: by postel.suug.ch (Postfix, from userid 10001) id 967F31C0EA; Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:30:47 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:30:47 +0100 From: Thomas Graf To: jamal Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [RFC] ematch API, u32 ematch, nbyte ematch, basic classifier Message-ID: <20050110233047.GC26856@postel.suug.ch> References: <20050105110048.GO26856@postel.suug.ch> <1104931991.1117.152.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050105144514.GQ26856@postel.suug.ch> <1105019225.2312.7.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050106194102.GW26856@postel.suug.ch> <1105105511.1046.77.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050108145457.GZ26856@postel.suug.ch> <1105363582.1041.162.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050110211747.GA26856@postel.suug.ch> <1105394738.1085.63.camel@jzny.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1105394738.1085.63.camel@jzny.localdomain> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.80/650/Sun Jan 2 19:00:02 2005 clamav-milter version 0.80j on 127.0.0.1 X-Virus-Status: Clean X-archive-position: 62 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 <1105394738.1085.63.camel@jzny.localdomain> 2005-01-10 17:05 > On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 16:17, Thomas Graf wrote: > > * jamal <1105363582.1041.162.camel@jzny.localdomain> 2005-01-10 08:26 > > > I think its _a hack_ Thomas ;-> Mostly because it has dependency on u32. > > > off2 doesnt exist on any other classifier and the basic ematch should be > > > usable by any classifier. > > > > It does not, u32 does have a dependency on em_u32 but not vice versa. > > em_u32 is perfectly useful even without nexthdr functionality since > > this is the way it is used today in 90% of the cases and it should be > > a little bit faster than em_cmp but also a bit less powerful. On top > > of that, rsvp could provide this information as well so one could > > extend rsvp with em_u32 ematches. I think we should not think of it > > as being dependant on off2 but rather as it is able to use information > > from a underlying layer. > > Ok, you make a convincing arguement ;-> No more concerns from my side. > Churn that code! I started testing via the basic classifier but will do the cls_u32 changes soon and then remerge and do the final tests once all the other pkt_sched changes have made it into linus's tree and I can work from a fresh bk tree. I'll also try to find the time this week to do the iproute2 changes for the tcf_exts changset so iproute2 is actually capable of configuring actions for all classifiers.