On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Pravin B Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/datapath/datapath.h b/datapath/datapath.h
>> index 879a830..5a89e0e 100644
>> --- a/datapath/datapath.h
>> +++ b/datapath/datapath.h
>> @@ -53,29 +53,29 @@
>> * up per packet.
>> */
>> struct dp_stats_percpu {
>> + struct u64_stats_sync sync;
>> + u64 n_mask_hit;
>> u64 n_hit;
>> u64 n_missed;
>> u64 n_lost;
>> - u64 n_mask_hit;
>> - struct u64_stats_sync sync;
>
> Can you update the comment to match the struct changes?
>
ok.
>> diff --git a/datapath/flow.h b/datapath/flow.h
>> index d1ac85a..bab87c3 100644
>> --- a/datapath/flow.h
>> +++ b/datapath/flow.h
>> @@ -156,14 +156,13 @@ struct sw_flow_stats {
>> } ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
>>
>> struct sw_flow {
>> - struct rcu_head rcu;
>> struct hlist_node hash_node[2];
>> - u32 hash;
>> -
>> - struct sw_flow_key key;
>> - struct sw_flow_key unmasked_key;
>> struct sw_flow_mask *mask;
>> + struct sw_flow_key key;
>> struct sw_flow_actions __rcu *sf_acts;
>> + struct sw_flow_key unmasked_key;
>> + u32 hash;
>> + struct rcu_head rcu;
>> struct sw_flow_stats stats[];
>> };
>
> I was surprised that we don't look at the hash in the fast path to
> avoid doing a comparison in the face of collisions. It seems we don't
> but can you think of a reason why not? I think we used to.
>
I think we can use it, I will send patch for same.
> Should we also sort struct table_instance for consistency? I realize
> that it's currently less than a cache line but it is in the fast path.
ok.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
