On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:40:30AM -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 9:00 AM Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > [..] > > > I thought it was pipe but maybe it is OK(in my opinion that is a bad code > > > for just "count"). We have some (at least NIC) hardware folks on the list. > > > > IIRC, 'OK' action will stop the processing for the packet, so it can > > only be used as a last action in the list. But we need to count packets > > as a very first action in the list. So, that doesn't help. > > > > That's why i said it is a bad code - but i believe it's what some of > the hardware > people are doing. Note: it's only bad if you have more actions after because > it aborts the processing pipeline. > > > > Note: we could create an alias to PIPE and call it COUNT if it helps. > > > > Will that help with offloading of that action? Why the PIPE is not > > offloadable in the first place and will COUNT be offloadable? > > Offloadable is just a semantic choice in this case. If someone is > using OK to count today - they could should be able to use PIPE > instead (their driver needs to do some transformation of course).
FWIIW, yes, that is my thinking too. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
