From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D0DC3BA8E for ; Wed, 30 May 2018 16:14:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id n3-v6so6250775lfe.12 for ; Wed, 30 May 2018 13:14:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NLl1E69btYVVmGbiCxbf13d/MRFu0GBnDOb9lDqcCm0=; b=Thpnk6Xe1MWdw9sLVyIsUJwxc8aXcS5ofwiFuGaT90aQiiY+CfATA/f8crCon9jgMQ bA2XTmv8gklw84poInfahEnFSBwzs+FpOlOvLr/fzkg2LEFznEmjl/TXqYNY7zCr+kRW DJz4wAF4dZw7BTzNR+Vvi8a/9AadvqCHyno5LVjMOOid5BNG3+GQwF0/Vl3NiK8KlQzx a0rHnC57Hck2f8/Mtl/TbIbaIdYgN8DKVn9P62mnOsTFoW9wW0bI3o4LYVd7rE9LOagZ QpQP3hqMgvKkIXM38VFWgn/ktdgxr/DkE/DEPaMtL1uKrNAhWVL/r+SMso7aTizmjXd0 S2ow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NLl1E69btYVVmGbiCxbf13d/MRFu0GBnDOb9lDqcCm0=; b=e1tKsbTHQw5QEgNFoZuQDQaUPvwKSGHkf/pRjwliIzHn2xxJiJNHYmGZyC8s2V3JX1 FEySx/NVfYjyIAM+2dGEOX5lLalCBfVgQW/1Gbn+XgkDtfqJqL4q3Y49kmY8XtAxGUMl 26jruh5vSWFpd+HQexjWBDDRASfKrahLpTsf5ui9xP7eHdcSs0XL3UzCE41kPWMHln0J s2Igz53OUVinwKuX17+RZaa+989LRbnVXWQfzJkFCT//Gs26I5sLWMKIfOaGNcj9VwAu Tz2PvRIZEcbOyRKx+sU50gLdPgTfAjm81z/t7TIM/95ES2wteBhdS54dSaZw6+aBd9/r 39aQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwc8rYqKb/BEP6rmGpz0wGzDoW6emeTjQzQm6PRvcogBZvjmJkhq o8uBWSGJgmqJyFc+2XhprE3ENS35y3KcBsGDO04= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIL6ug10xXUOX65bNH/e/qt0Le5ycTvB/FJLoV0/O75lYk/JB1xhkscPXDeJgRSfw30oMhMJwfqnHe72dtyIzY= X-Received: by 2002:a19:4355:: with SMTP id m21-v6mr2628188lfj.121.1527711277148; Wed, 30 May 2018 13:14:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a2e:9155:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2018 13:14:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <87muwyy34k.fsf@toke.dk> <87tvqoc3vl.fsf@toke.dk> From: Georgios Amanakis Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 16:14:36 -0400 Message-ID: To: Cake List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Cake] Fwd: Does the latest cake support "tc filter"? X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 20:14:38 -0000 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Georgios Amanakis Date: Wed, May 30, 2018 at 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Cake] Does the latest cake support "tc filter"? To: Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen :) excellent work! Now it works as expected! Thanks again, George On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: > Georgios Amanakis writes: > >>> Yes, the version submitted to upstream supports this. You can override >>> which tin packets goes in by setting skb->priority from a filter or >>> application (the major number needs to be set to the qdisc ID, and the >>> minor number becomes the tin to queue packets in). >> >> Toke could you give an example how to do this? >> >> I am trying to put all traffic into tin 0: >> #tc qdisc add dev enp1s0 root handle 8001 cake diffserv3 bandwidth 2mbit >> #tc filter add dev enp1s0 parent 8001: protocol all \ >> u32 match u32 0 0 \ >> action skbedit priority 8001:1 >> >> However as soon as the second command is executed all traffic drops, >> and it only resumes once I remove the filter. >> >> What am I doing wrong? > > Hmm, nothing apart from using the classifiers in an unexpected (by me) > way ;) > > Basically, what is happening is that the skbedit filter doesn't do > classification. In which case Cake will cheerfully drop the packet. > > I just pushed a change to the upstream-4.18 branch which reworks the > filter classification so it'll still hash packets if the filter doesn't > make a decision, and also moves the tin selection to after the filter > has run, to give priority selection a chance to work (even if the > packets had not been dropped, you wouldn't have gotten the result you > wanted, since the skb->priority field was checked before the filters we > run...) > > Please see if that works better :) > > -Toke