Subject: Re: patch: Action repeat

From: Patrick McHardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 02:06:12 +0200

jamal wrote:
> You mean not passing it back via skbs but through something else?
> What do you have in mind?
> It does sound distasteful for either changing the ->act()
> parametrization just so we can have a classid passed back or provide a
> spot for it in struct tc_action since only some actions will need to
> change it. 

I meant changing ->act() to have the same prototype as tcf_act_exec()
itself:

-       int     (*act)(struct sk_buff **, struct tc_action *);
+       int     (*act)(struct sk_buff **, struct tc_action *, struct 
tcf_result *);

> I see the issue with classid leaking - perhaps specific actions could
> reset it when they steal packets? We should also reset it if the packet
> is stolen.

Since its already reset after actions are executed, we only need to
additionally reset it for packets that take a different path.
At the moment I think this only happens with mirred.

Regards
Patrick