[Top] [All Lists]

Re: patch: Action repeat

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: patch: Action repeat
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 15:28:22 +0200
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1115211549.7665.140.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050430200848.GF577@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1114894202.8929.165.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050430215550.GH577@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1114900485.8929.171.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050430235809.GI577@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1115035838.8929.236.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050502150632.GM577@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1115207194.7665.109.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050504123157.GA18452@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1115211549.7665.140.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
* jamal <1115211549.7665.140.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-05-04 08:59
> On Wed, 2005-04-05 at 14:31 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > * jamal <1115207194.7665.109.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-05-04 07:46
> > > tc_verd to say "clear tc_classid" and have the meta action decide if it
> > > is global(dont clear) or not(clear - current behavior) during
> > > clone/copy . Does this sound reasonable?
> > 
> > I have no objections but fail to see why we want to clear it anyway?
> > 
> If its scope is local i.e for one device, then not reseting could
> confuse the next device that sees it and tries to classify on it.

OK, so we're not talking about a reset in action_exec() but rather
in tc_classify() or enqueue()?

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>