On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 03:53:14PM +0200, Adrian Moreno wrote: > > > On 4/26/23 15:39, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 05:16:50PM +0200, Adrian Moreno wrote: > > > In preparation for supporting 64-bit rates in tc policies, move the > > > allocation and initialization of struct tc_police object inside > > > nl_msg_put_act_police(). That way, the function is now called with the > > > actual rates. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Moreno <amore...@redhat.com> > > > > Tested-by: Simon Horman <simon.hor...@corigine.com>
Sorry, I think I may have hit the wrong button there. I don't recall testing this. So I must have meant. Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.hor...@corigine.com> > > > lib/netdev-linux.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++------------------- > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/netdev-linux.c b/lib/netdev-linux.c > > > index 8ee75981b..a2bae300c 100644 > > > --- a/lib/netdev-linux.c > > > +++ b/lib/netdev-linux.c > > > @@ -2653,21 +2653,26 @@ nl_msg_act_police_end_nest(struct ofpbuf > > > *request, size_t offset, > > > } > > > static void > > > -nl_msg_put_act_police(struct ofpbuf *request, struct tc_police *police, > > > +nl_msg_put_act_police(struct ofpbuf *request, uint32_t index, > > > + uint64_t kbits_rate, uint64_t kbits_burst, > > > uint64_t pkts_rate, uint64_t pkts_burst, > > > uint32_t notexceed_act, bool single_action) > > > > nit: not that I have a good idea of a better approach, > > but this has a lot of parameters now :( > > > > I know, I felt the same but I don't see a clean way of improving this. Ack _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
