On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 12:09:51PM +0200, Paul Blakey wrote:

On 14/02/2023 21:24, Edward Cree wrote:

quoted

On 14/02/2023 18:48, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 02:31:06PM +0200, Oz Shlomo wrote:

quoted

Actually, I think the current naming scheme of act_cookie and miss_cookie
makes sense.

Then perhaps,
act_cookie here -> instance_cookie
miss_cookie -> config_cookie

Sorry for the bikeshedding, btw, but these cookies are getting
confusing. We need them to taste nice :-}

I'm with Oz, keep the current name for act_cookie.

(In my ideal world, it'd just be called cookie, and the existing
  cookie in struct flow_action_entry would be renamed user_cookie.
  Because act_cookie is the same thing conceptually as
  flow_cls_offload.cookie.  Though I wonder if that means it
  belongs in struct flow_offload_action instead?)

-ed

Ok so I want to add this patch to the series:


From 326938812758dbd2591b221452708504911ca419 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Paul Blakey <redacted>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 10:57:40 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] net: sched: Rename user cookie and act cookie

struct tc_action->act_cookie is a user defined cookie,
and the related struct flow_action_entry->act_cookie is
used as an handle similar to struct flow_cls_offload->cookie.

Rename tc_action->act_cookie to user_cookie, and
flow_action_entry->act_cookie to cookie so their names
would better fit their usage.

Makes sense. This helps a lot already.
(I didn't review the patch carefully yet, but it seems good)
Thanks!