https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=282984
--- Comment #2 from Leonid Evdokimov <leon+free...@darkk.net.ru> --- (In reply to Kristof Provost from comment #1) I also dislike the name, but I failed to come up with a better one. I'd appreciate help here. "touch" is a bad one as it actually changes counters. "clear" sounds like an option, but might be confused with "flush", so IMO it's even worse than "makezero". "mark" might come from mark-n-sweep gc, but it's confusing in this context. "rearm" comes with watchdog/timer semantics that is kinda close, but still not 100% applicable. "reset" is almost the winner, but TCP has already taken the word for RST. I would say "reset" is my 2nd preferred option after "makezero". So I'm kinda out of reasonable options. > come with some performance penalty It's probably my mistake made under assumption that counter-aware tables have different memory layout and handling. I was unaware of pfr_get_astats() saying that > It was possible to have a table without per-entry counters. Now they are > always allocated, we just discard data when reading it if table is not > configured to have counters. ACK for tests & commit message. Will do. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
