On 8/15/21 3:07 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 02:17:08PM +0200, alexandre.ferrieux@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
[...]
So, the only way forward would be a separate hashtable on ids.
Using the rhashtable implementation is fine for this, it's mostly
boilerplate code that is needed to use it and there are plenty of
examples in the kernel tree if you need a reference.
Thanks, that's indeed pretty simple. I was just worried that people would object
to adding even the slightest overhead (hash_add/hash_del) to the existing code
path, that satisfies 99% of uses (LIFO). What do you think ?
PS: what is the intended dominant use case for batch verdicts ?
Issuing a batch containing several packets helps to amortize the
cost of the syscall.
Yes, but that could also be achieved by passing an array of ids. The extra
constraint of using a (contiguous) range means that there is no outlier. This
seems to imply that ranges are no help when flows are multiplexed. Or maybe, the
assumption was that bursts tend to be homogeneous ?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
