RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v4 5/6] ice: support egress drop rules on PF

[Romanowski, Rafal]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
> Simon Horman
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2025 3:59 PM
> To: Zaremba, Larysa <larysa.zaremba@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Nguyen, Anthony L <anthony.l.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx>; intel-wired-
> lan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Kitszel, Przemyslaw <przemyslaw.kitszel@xxxxxxxxx>;
> Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx>; David S. Miller
> <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jakub
> Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>; Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Michal Swiatkowski
> <michal.swiatkowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pacuszka, MateuszX
> <mateuszx.pacuszka@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v4 5/6] ice: support egress drop
> rules on PF
> 
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:50:39AM +0100, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > tc clsact qdisc allows us to add offloaded egress rules with commands
> > such as the following one:
> >
> > tc filter add dev <ifname> egress protocol lldp flower skip_sw action
> > drop
> >
> > Support the egress rule drop action when added to PF, with a few caveats:
> > * in switchdev mode, all PF traffic has to go uplink with an exception for
> >   LLDP that can be delegated to a single VSI at a time
> > * in legacy mode, we cannot delegate LLDP functionality to another VSI, so
> >   such packets from PF should not be blocked.
> >
> > Also, simplify the rule direction logic, it was previously derived
> > from actions, but actually can be inherited from the tc block (and
> > flipped in case of port representors).
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxx>

Tested-by: Rafal Romanowski <rafal.romanowski@xxxxxxxxx>