Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] net_sched: add network namespace support for tc actions

From: Jamal Hadi Salim <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 08:42:43 -0500

On 16-02-20 07:46 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Daniel Borkmann <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> Do you see a way to reduce the code duplication needed across all
>> the action modules? I.e. that each of them now needs to register
>> a new per netns subsystem, etc. In other words, is there a way the
>> action API could be reworked to handle most of this in the tc core
>> framework instead?
>
> I definitely agree.
>

Same here.

> Initially I made a wrapper macro for the per netns API for each tc
> action, but it didn't work as I thought, mostly due to the per net ops and
> net_id stuffs.
>
> So it is not as easy as it appears, it needs more work. At least the
> current code is more readable than using any macro. We can always
> refactor the API in the future, and as I mentioned in the changelog that
> is in my plan.
>
> Or do you have any quick and easy way to reduce the code?
>

I did a quick look and i am struggling with it. The patch seems largish
The issue is that we need to do this per kernel module so the code
churn maybe unavoidable; hinfo stored in act_ops complicates things.
Having said that:  All the pernet operations in your
code seem to be generic, other than to accomodate for module specific
act_ops. Is it possible to make generic pernet operations? This way
you could do things at tcf_register_action() for all actions.
The challenge seems to be in the xxx_net_id which appears(sorry didnt
look closely at the namespace code) to need to be unique id per module
and per namespace instance - otherwise i would suggest for xxx_net_id
to be part of act_ops. Could we not have an #ifdef in the namespace
core like the netfilter code does and have one level of indirection
for everything but the namespace 0?

cheers,
jamal