Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > How? What address? You mean relative offset to counter start? > > No, the address itself. This is what I coded years ago. > > when rule x matches, I need to increment the corresponding counter > > for that rule. > > Right. You have in the rule itself the storage for xt_counter. Thats 16 > bytes. You only need 8 bytes (on 64bit arch) to store the percpu > address. > Instead of leaving nothing in it, place the percpu address of the > corresponding counter. access to it is in the cache line needed to > analyze the entry anyway. Its free. I'm dense. So, what you're saying is that I should alloc_percpu(sizeof(struct xt_counters)); for each rule and store the resulting address in ipt_entry? Then it would be possible to get the correct location for current cpu when counter has to be incremented. Thanks Eric. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
