On 3/1/2023 8:44 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
On 2/28/23 14:05, Chris Mi wrote:
On 2/24/2023 4:16 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
On 2/23/23 12:26, Chris Mi wrote:
Initialize psample socket. Add sFlow recv API to receive sampled
packets from psample socket. Add sFow recv wait API to add psample
socket fd to poll list.
Signed-off-by: Chris Mi<c...@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Roi Dayan<r...@nvidia.com>
---
lib/dpif.h | 7 ++
lib/netdev-offload-provider.h | 11 ++
lib/netdev-offload-tc.c | 188 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 206 insertions(+)
<snip>
+{
+ int read_tries = 0;
+
+ if (!psample_sock) {
+ return ENOENT;
+ }
+
+ for (;;) {
+ struct offload_psample psample;
+ struct offload_sflow sflow;
+ int error;
+
+ if (++read_tries > 50) {
+ return EAGAIN;
+ }
+
+ error = nl_sock_recv(psample_sock, buf, NULL, false);
+ if (error == ENOBUFS) {
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if (error) {
+ if (error == EAGAIN) {
+ break;
+ }
+ return error;
+ }
+
+ error = psample_from_ofpbuf(&psample, buf);
+ if (!error) {
+ return psample_parse_packet(&psample, &sflow, upcall);
+ } else if (error) {
Condition here is always true.
I copied from dpif_netlink_recv_cpu_dispatch(). And I also think it is ok.
The 'if' condition in dpif_netlink_recv_cpu_dispatch() is different
and so the 'else if (error)' is not always true there. But it is
always true here, hence makes no practical sense.
OK, I see. I'll change the code like this:
error = psample_from_ofpbuf(&psample, buf);
if (!error) {
return psample_parse_packet(&psample, upcall);
} else {
return error;
}
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
