On 2/24/22 10:57 PM, Menglong Dong wrote: >>> >>> For tun unique filters, how about using a shortened version of the ioctl >>> name used to set the filter. >>> >> >> Although TUN is widely used in virtualization environment, it is only one of >> many drivers. I prefer to not introduce a reason that can be used only by a >> specific driver. >> >> In order to make it more generic and more re-usable (e.g., perhaps people may >> add ebpf filter to TAP driver as well), how about we create below reasons. >> >> SKB_DROP_REASON_DEV_FILTER, /* dropped by filter attached to >> * or directly implemented by a >> * specific driver >> */ >> SKB_DROP_REASON_BPF_DEV, /* dropped by bpf directly >> * attached to a specific device, >> * e.g., via TUNSETFILTEREBPF >> */ > > Aren't DEV_FILTER and BPF_DEV too generic? eBPF atached to netdev can > be many kinds, such as XDP, TC, etc. yes. > > I think that use TAP_TXFILTER instaed of DEV_FILTER maybe better? > and TAP_FILTER->BPF_DEV. Make them similar to the name in > __tun_chr_ioctl() may be easier for user to understand. > in this case given the unique attach points and API tap in the name seems more appropriate
