On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Liping Zhang wrote:
> Hi Vishwanath,
>
> 2016-09-23 0:43 GMT+08:00 Vishwanath Pai :
>>
>> /* Precision saver. */
>> -static u32 user2credits(u32 user)
>> +static u64 user2credits(u64 user, int revision)
>> {
>> - /*
Hi Vishwanath,
2016-09-23 0:43 GMT+08:00 Vishwanath Pai :
>
> /* Precision saver. */
> -static u32 user2credits(u32 user)
> +static u64 user2credits(u64 user, int revision)
> {
> - /* If multiplying would overflow... */
> - if (user > 0x /
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 01:35:01PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 02:39:45PM -0400, Vishwanath Pai wrote:
> > Thanks for pointing this out, I will reorder the fields to:
> >
> > struct hashlimit_cfg2 {
> > __u64 avg;/* Average secs between packets * scale */
> >
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 02:39:45PM -0400, Vishwanath Pai wrote:
> Thanks for pointing this out, I will reorder the fields to:
>
> struct hashlimit_cfg2 {
> __u64 avg;/* Average secs between packets * scale */
> __u64 burst;
> __u32 mode; /* bitmask of XT_HASHLIMIT_HASH_* */
Thanks for pointing this out, I will reorder the fields to:
struct hashlimit_cfg2 {
__u64 avg;/* Average secs between packets * scale */
__u64 burst;
__u32 mode; /* bitmask of XT_HASHLIMIT_HASH_* */
This should fix the hole and avoid padding.
-Vishwanath
On
On Thursday 2016-09-22 18:43, Vishwanath Pai wrote:
>+struct hashlimit_cfg2 {
>+ __u32 mode; /* bitmask of XT_HASHLIMIT_HASH_* */
>+ __u64 avg;/* Average secs between packets * scale */
>+ __u64 burst; /* Period multiplier for upper limit. */
This would have different