On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 18:30:44 +0300 Andrey Zhadchenko wrote:
> -static size_t ovs_dp_cmd_msg_size(void)
> +static size_t ovs_dp_cmd_msg_size(struct datapath *dp)
> {
> size_t msgsize = NLMSG_ALIGN(sizeof(struct ovs_header));
> + struct dp_nlsk_pids *pids = ovsl_dereference(dp->upcall_portids);
> +
>
double new line
> msgsize += nla_total_size(IFNAMSIZ);
> msgsize += nla_total_size_64bit(sizeof(struct ovs_dp_stats));
> @@ -1516,6 +1518,9 @@ static size_t ovs_dp_cmd_msg_size(void)
> msgsize += nla_total_size(sizeof(u32)); /* OVS_DP_ATTR_USER_FEATURES */
> msgsize += nla_total_size(sizeof(u32)); /* OVS_DP_ATTR_MASKS_CACHE_SIZE
> */
>
> + if (dp->user_features & OVS_DP_F_DISPATCH_UPCALL_PER_CPU && pids)
> + msgsize += nla_total_size_64bit(sizeof(u32) * pids->n_pids);
Can we make a safe over estimation here, like nr_cpu_ids maybe?
Would that be too large? It's fairly common to overestimate the
netlink message allocation.
Also why 64bit if the value is in u32 units?
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
