On 4 Jan 2023, at 19:36, Michael Santana wrote:
> On 12/22/22 03:58, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>> Instead of using all zero stats when executing a revalidate for missed
>> dp flows, use the last known stats to avoid odd statistics being used.
> This feels like it's missing some context. What kind of statistics are you
> seeing with using all zeros?
Not sure I understand your question, but we put in zero stats when calling
revalidate_ukey(), i.e., memset(&stats, 0, sizeof stats).
This is all internal revalidate handling, we do not see any stats from a user
perspective.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
>> index 464c304a8..7144b2945 100644
>> --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
>> +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
>> @@ -2878,7 +2878,7 @@ revalidator_sweep__(struct revalidator *revalidator,
>> bool purge)
>> } else {
>> struct dpif_flow_stats stats;
>> COVERAGE_INC(revalidate_missed_dp_flow);
>> - memset(&stats, 0, sizeof stats);
>> + memcpy(&stats, &ukey->stats, sizeof stats);
>> result = revalidate_ukey(udpif, ukey, &stats,
>> &odp_actions,
>> reval_seq, &recircs, false);
>> }
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
>>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
