Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] ipv6: Add support for non-equal-cost multipath
From: David Ahern <hidden>
Date: 2018-01-10 15:53:16
On 1/10/18 4:47 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
Hi David, On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:48:37PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:quoted
On 1/9/18 7:40 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:quoted
The use of hash-threshold instead of modulo-N makes it trivial to add support for non-equal-cost multipath. Instead of dividing the multipath hash function's output space equally between the nexthops, each nexthop is assigned a region size which is proportional to its weight. Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <redacted> --- include/net/ip6_fib.h | 1 + net/ipv6/route.c | 11 +++++++---- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)diff --git a/include/net/ip6_fib.h b/include/net/ip6_fib.h index 97cd05d87780..34ec321d6a03 100644 --- a/include/net/ip6_fib.h +++ b/include/net/ip6_fib.h@@ -171,6 +171,7 @@ struct rt6_info { u32 rt6i_metric; u32 rt6i_pmtu; /* more non-fragment space at head required */ + int rt6i_nh_weight; unsigned short rt6i_nfheader_len; u8 rt6i_protocol; u8 exception_bucket_flushed:1,Since dst is cacheline aligned there is a hole after rt6i_nh_flags. In patch 1 you put rt6i_nh_upper_bound in that hole. Putting the weight there too keeps those variables together as well as using the open space.Before patch 1 there's a hole of 4 bytes after rt6i_nh_flags which I use for rt6i_nh_upper_bound. If I put rt6i_nh_weight there as well, then I create a 60 bytes hole because the dst needs to be cached aligned. Since rt6i_nh_weight isn't used in fast-path, I just put it at the end.
Apparently, I was on a 4.14 branch when I ran pahole to dump the layout of rt6_info. The patch looks good to me. Acked-by: David Ahern <redacted>