Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFC\]\s+meta\s+ematch\s*$/: 34 ]

Total 34 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:13:40 +0100
* Patrick McHardy <41E6C3E5.2020908@xxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-13 19:54 Looks great. I have a few doubts about about the set of chosen values though. Things like nf_debug and nf_cache were never meant to be
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02060.html (14,667 bytes)

22. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:14:07 +0100
* Patrick McHardy <41E71CC4.3020102@xxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-14 02:13 Yes, I'm kind of afraid to create a too big dependency on netfilter, so I sticked to the easly reachable values. I think I'll remove th
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02080.html (36,336 bytes)

23. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 09:58:40 -0500
I scanned the code very quickly; lets start with the big picture then i will send some more comments: Did i understand this correctly that a metamatch MUST have a lvalue + rvalue pair? What if all i
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02148.html (11,724 bytes)

24. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:09:14 +0100
* jamal <1105887519.1097.597.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-16 09:58 They MAY have bove. The lvalue will be TCF_META_ID_INDEV and your rvalue will be TCF_META_TYPE_VAR with "eth0" as payload(TCF_EM_
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02149.html (11,461 bytes)

25. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 10:37:54 -0500
ok - i get it. So the rvalue is basically just the data that needs to be compared against. rvalue confused me a little. If you had called it meta_data i would have got it right away. But now that you
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02150.html (11,870 bytes)

26. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:57:58 +0100
* jamal <1105889874.1090.613.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-16 10:37 The rvalue may also point to a metadata in the kernel. This gets useful when comparing dev against real dev or if nfmark, tcindex
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02151.html (12,158 bytes)

27. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 11:11:11 -0500
[..] Does it smell like there may be endianess issues? Probably not. Since filters are attached to devices - is TCF_META_ID_DEV of any value? Those last two look like meta_obj you defined above 200 h
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02152.html (18,092 bytes)

28. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 11:19:21 -0500
ok, more clarity. Can you explain the above in context of indev = "eth0"? I am still not sure i get it: + if (meta_get(skb, info, &meta->lvalue, &l_value) < 0 || + meta_get(skb, info, &meta->rvalue,
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02153.html (12,055 bytes)

29. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:32:12 +0100
* jamal <1105891871.1097.647.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-16 11:11 Not really as long as iproute2 uses the same byte ordering. It has the same issues as all other rtnetlink users. Yes, to compare
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02155.html (14,848 bytes)

30. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:32:32 +0100
+static int meta_int_loadavg_2(struct sk_buff *skb, struct tcf_pkt_info *info, + struct meta_value *v, struct meta_obj *dst) +{ + dst->value = fixed_loadavg(avenrun[2]); + return 0; +} Theres a lot
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02156.html (12,886 bytes)

31. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:49:05 +0100
* jamal <1105892360.1091.655.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-16 11:19 Sure, indev = "eth0" TCA_EM_META_HDR = { .left = { .kind = TCF_META_TYPE_VAR << 12 | TCF_META_ID_INDEV, .op = TCF_EM_EQ, }, .righ
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02157.html (12,239 bytes)

32. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 12:18:56 -0500
wont harm to do a quick test if you have hardware. pedit for example still has some occasional issues some issues with big endian which i havent had time to chase. makes sense fine know why they have
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02160.html (16,456 bytes)

33. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 12:24:12 -0500
[..] [..] I am not sure i remember whether -1 or 1 is the LT even though i have used strcmp for years ;-> Actually i try hard not to have my brain remember. In the case of the .get function above, i
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02162.html (12,029 bytes)

34. Re: [RFC] meta ematch (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 19:47:51 +0100
* jamal <1105895936.1090.717.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-16 12:18 Uhmm.. yes. The endianess comes in at sutff like skb->protocol. Leaving it to userspace makes comparison beyond simple equals qui
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02172.html (11,335 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu