From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xi Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rps: fix insufficient bounds checking in store_rps_dev_flow_table_cnt() Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:56:50 -0500 Message-ID: <4DA4756B-0654-49F4-B135-9A9F89BC7D21@gmail.com> References: <1324493459-19764-1-git-send-email-xi.wang@gmail.com> <4EF3BEBA.4040402@gmail.com> <1324613414.2674.2.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1324616007.2674.8.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1324617390.2674.13.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1324618555.10854.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Tom Herbert , "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:34068 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750718Ab1LWF4y (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:56:54 -0500 Received: by iaeh11 with SMTP id h11so14585146iae.19 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:56:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1324618555.10854.4.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Dec 23, 2011, at 12:35 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > By the way, the theorical limit on number of flows on 64bit platform is > 2^32 (rxhash being an u32) > > Not sure spending 32GB per table would be wise for typical machines :) True, a large rps_flow_cnt is not that useful. ;-) Anyway, my point is that if the patch looks confusing to you, then it is probably not good. I am happy to see a more elegant fix. - xi