The short answer is no, don’t just change the size. The vnet_classify_entry_t
is packed, and has a documented alignment requirement:
typedef CLIB_PACKED(struct _vnet_classify_entry {
<snip>
vnet_classify_action_t action;
u16 metadata;
<snip>
/* Must be aligned to a 16-octet boundary */
u32x4 key[0];
}) vnet_classify_entry_t;
As it turns out, a number of fields in the vnet_classify_entry_t are
over-sized. Next_index is a graph node arc index which needs to hold a small
integer with a typical upper bound less than 100, not 4e9. The 2x u8’s flags
and action could be combined. Last_heard (time of last classifier hit) seems
completely unused. It’s not a bad idea, but folks don’t use it.
FWIW... Dave
From: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> On Behalf Of Dimitar Ivanov
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 3:37 AM
To: vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
Subject: [vpp-dev] Type mismatch in classify session #vnet
Hi,
To function vnet_classify_add_del_session we can pass parameter metadata. I
see that depending on some actions metadata is predefined. But when action is
CLASSIFY_ACTION_SET_METADATA, passed metadata is stored in new session entry. I
plan to use this entry for my purposes. But why to function is passed u32 as
metadata, also functions that set some metadata automatically, depend on
action, returns u32 and at the same time definition of vnet_classify_entry_t
size of metadata is u16 ? I use version 19.08. Is is enough safe just to change
size in vnet_classify_entry_t ?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#14698): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/14698
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/61956200/21656
Mute #vnet: https://lists.fd.io/mk?hashtag=vnet&subid=1480452
Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
