From 61ce940e17bcc13378c59fed8247a1afa7ae918d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Phil Sutter Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:10:39 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] iproute2: unify naming for entries offloaded to hardware Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1417289 Upstream Status: iproute2.git commit aa05b988f53b5 commit aa05b988f53b5ce68f25c5b4e52c6bd3e32a6347 Author: Andy Gospodarek Date: Fri Apr 10 16:50:40 2015 -0400 iproute2: unify naming for entries offloaded to hardware The kernel now has the capability to offload FDB and FIB entries to hardware. It is important to let users know if table entries are also offloaded to hardware. Currently offloaded FDB entries are indicated by the existence of the flag 'external' on the entry as of the following commit: commit 28467b7f3facd6114b2fbe0c9fecf57adbd52e12 Author: Scott Feldman Date: Thu Dec 4 09:57:15 2014 +0100 bridge/fdb: add flag/indication for FDB entry synced from offload device When the patch to add support for indicating that FIB entries were also offloaded as posted to netdev by Scott Feldman it became clear that 'external' would not be an ideal name for routes. There could definitely be confusion about what this might mean since many routes are to external networks -- a collision/confusion that did not happen with FDB. Scott Feldman asked me to check with others and build concensus around a name. After speaking with several people about this I am proposing we refer to both FDB and FIB entries that are currently backed by hardware (based on the work done in rocker) with the flag 'offload' appended to the end ofthe entry. Some people liked the string 'external,' others liked 'hardware,' but the point is to communicate that these routes are available to something that will will offload the forwarding normally done by the kernel. Since the term 'offload' is used so frequently it seems appropriate to use the same language in ip/bridge output. The term 'offload' also seems to resonate with many of the people who have responded on Scott's original thread or to those who I reached out to directly and did respond to my query, so it seems we have reached consensus that it should be the term used going forward. v2: rebased against net-next branch Signed-off-by: Andy Gospodarek CC: Jamal Hadi Salim CC: Jeff Kirsher CC: Jiri Pirko CC: John W. Linville CC: Roopa Prabhu CC: Scott Feldman CC: Stephen Hemminger --- bridge/fdb.c | 2 +- ip/iproute.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/bridge/fdb.c b/bridge/fdb.c index 3020633..edf621c 100644 --- a/bridge/fdb.c +++ b/bridge/fdb.c @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ int print_fdb(const struct sockaddr_nl *who, struct nlmsghdr *n, void *arg) if (r->ndm_flags & NTF_ROUTER) fprintf(fp, "router "); if (r->ndm_flags & NTF_EXT_LEARNED) - fprintf(fp, "external "); + fprintf(fp, "offload "); fprintf(fp, "%s\n", state_n2a(r->ndm_state)); return 0; diff --git a/ip/iproute.c b/ip/iproute.c index 6d64469..3f4b91a 100644 --- a/ip/iproute.c +++ b/ip/iproute.c @@ -439,7 +439,7 @@ int print_route(const struct sockaddr_nl *who, struct nlmsghdr *n, void *arg) if (r->rtm_flags & RTNH_F_PERVASIVE) fprintf(fp, "pervasive "); if (r->rtm_flags & RTNH_F_EXTERNAL) - fprintf(fp, "external "); + fprintf(fp, "offload "); if (r->rtm_flags & RTM_F_NOTIFY) fprintf(fp, "notify "); if (tb[RTA_MARK]) { -- 1.8.3.1