Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 6/10/22 11:52 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 1:41 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>>> Except we'd want to also support multiple programs on different >>>>> priorities? I don't think requiring a libxdp-like dispatcher to achieve >>>>> this is a good idea if we can just have it be part of the API from the >>>>> get-go... >>>> >>>> Yes, it will be multi-prog to avoid a situation where dispatcher is needed. >>> >>> Awesome! :) >> >> Let's keep it simple to start. >> Priorities or anything fancy can be added later if really necessary. >> Otherwise, I'm afraid, we will go into endless bikeshedding >> or the best priority scheme. >> >> A link list of bpf progs like cls_bpf with the same semantics as >> cls_bpf_classify. >> With prog->exts_integrated always true and no classid, since this >> concept doesn't apply. > Yes, semantics must be that TC_ACT_UNSPEC continues in the list and > everything else as return code would terminate the evaluation. Sure, SGTM! -Toke
