On 11/09/2016 06:06 PM, Brenden Blanco wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:57:32AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 11/09/2016 10:45 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:05:31AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 11/09/2016 08:35 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
There are rx_ring_num queues. Each
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:57:32AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 10:45 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:05:31AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> >>On 11/09/2016 08:35 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
> >>>There are rx_ring_num queues. Each queue will load xdp prog. So
> >>>bpf_
On 11/09/2016 10:45 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:05:31AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 11/09/2016 08:35 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
There are rx_ring_num queues. Each queue will load xdp prog. So
bpf_prog_add() should add rx_ring_num to ref_cnt.
Signed-off-by: Zhiyi Sun
Your
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:05:31AM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 11/09/2016 08:35 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
> > There are rx_ring_num queues. Each queue will load xdp prog. So
> > bpf_prog_add() should add rx_ring_num to ref_cnt.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zhiyi Sun
>
> Your analysis looks incorrect
On 11/09/2016 08:35 AM, Zhiyi Sun wrote:
There are rx_ring_num queues. Each queue will load xdp prog. So
bpf_prog_add() should add rx_ring_num to ref_cnt.
Signed-off-by: Zhiyi Sun
Your analysis looks incorrect to me. Please elaborate in more detail why
you think current code is buggy ...
Cal
5 matches
Mail list logo