On Thursday, August 1, 2024 7:53 AM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:41:16 -0700 Jacob Keller wrote: >> In this case, (I haven't dug into the actual patches or code), I suspect >> the driver will need to validate the location values when adding rules >> to ensure that all rules which don't use the default queue have higher >> priority than the wild card rule. The request to add a filter should >> reject the rule in the case where a default queue rule was added with a >> higher priority location. > >Maybe I shouldn't say it aloud but picking a "known" location for such >a wildcard rule wouldn't be the worst thing. Obviously better if the >driver just understand ordering! Thanks Jakub Kicinski and Jacob Keller for the suggestions. I believe that it is a good idea to validate and ensure that the default queue rule is located at the lowest priority location (loc 63). I will go for this direction on my v2 submission.
