Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:24:10AM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote: >On 16-07-21 05:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:00:33AM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote: >>>On 16-07-21 04:19 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>>>From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com> >>>> >[..] >> >>>infrastructure. If answer is yes, thencould we have used >>>a classifier like u32 here? >>>i.e something like: >>>tc filter add dev eth25 xxxx protocol all \ >>>u32 match u32 0 0 \ >>>action mirred ... >> >>That could be used. But I believe it is nicer to have explicit match-all >>classifier for this case. That puts nice limit to what could be matched. >> > >Iam indifferent. If you are planning to use u32 for ACL then it would >make sense to support span + ACL with the same classifier. > >>Could you point to that? checkpatch.pl does not say anything and I also >>don't see anything. >> > >scripts/Lindent (but you need to be a little careful with it) >Generally the coding style guide in Documentation is sufficient.
As I said, I don't see any issue. Could you please reply to that specific patch on a place where you see the issue? Thanks.
