Akshat Kakkar wrote:
Its quite lonely out here. Please help !
You are the one who is testing - if you think it's a bug make a test
case that should work that it breaks and post on netdev.
I never used hashing for real - maybe years ago I tested something that
seemed to work, but I have no deep knowledge.
Maybe it just doesn't matter - maybe it does - maybe it's a useful
feature (If you hash from many other filters and run out of handles then
it may or may not be handy if it "goes linear" and runs down the
clashing filters).
I am making all this up as I type - you can test.
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Akshat Kakkar <akshat.1984@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I executed simply following 3 commands
tc qdsic add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb
tc filter add dev dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 10 handle
::1 u32 ht 800:0 match ip src 192.168.1.1
tc filter add dev dev eth0 protocol ip parent 1:0 prio 10 handle
::1 u32 ht 800:0 match ip src 192.168.1.2
Clearly, second filter is being inserted in the same location
(i.e. same filter id 800:0:1) as the first filter. There was no
error generated and infact when I listed the filters, using
tc filter show dev eth0
both the filters are listed!!
Is this a bug or a feature which I am unware of or something else?
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lartc"
in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo
info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lartc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
