Re: [PATCH net-next] tuntap: Fallback to automq on TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF prog negative return

[Jason Wang]

On 2019/9/24 äå12:31, Matt Cover wrote:
> > I think it's better to safe to just drop the packet instead of trying to
> > workaround it.
> This patch aside, dropping the packet here
> seems like the wrong choice. Loading a
> prog at this hookpoint "configures"
> steering. The action of configuring
> steering should not result in dropped
> packets.
>
> Suboptimal delivery is generally preferable
> to no delivery. Leaving the behavior as-is
> (i.e. relying on netdev_cap_txqueue()) or
> making any return which doesn't fit in a
> u16 simply use queue 0 would be highly
> preferable to dropping the packet.
>
> > Thanks


It leaves a choice for steering ebpf program to drop the packet that it 
can't classify. But consider we have already had socket filter, it 
probably not a big problem since we can drop packets there.

Thanks