Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 03/02, Florian Westphal wrote:
> > + struct {
> > + __u32 pf;
> > + __u32 hooknum;
> > + __s32 prio;
> > + } netfilter;
>
> For recent tc BPF program extensions, we've discussed that it might be
> better
> to have an option to attach program before/after another one in the chain.
> So the API essentially would receive a before/after flag + fd/id of the
>
> Should we do something similar here? See [0] for the original
> discussion.
>
> 0: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YzzWDqAmN5DRTupQ@xxxxxxxxxx/
Thanks for the pointer, I will have a look.
The above exposes the "prio" of netfilter hooks, so someone
that needs their hook to run early on, say, before netfilters
nat engine, could just use INT_MIN.
We could -- for nf bpf -- make the bpf_link fail if a hook
with the same priority already exists to avoid the "undefined
behaviour" here (same prio means register order decides what
hook function runs first ...).
This could be relevant if you have e.g. one bpf program collecting
statistics vs. one doing drops.
I'll dig though the thread and would try to mimic the tc link
mechanism as close as possible.
