optimize: fix bpf ins over 100w #1059
Conversation
nlgwcy
force-pushed
the
bugfix
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ef93463 to
2d01da6
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
see 1 file with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
🚨 Try these New Features:
|
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
Signed-off-by: wuchangye <wuchangye@huawei.com>
| return -ENOENT; | ||
|
|
||
| if (ret) | ||
| BPF_LOG(ERR, SERVICE, "lb_locality_failover_hdl [%u %u %u]\n", service_id, i, endpoint_k.backend_index); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lb_locality_failover_hdl typo
Signed-off-by: wuchangye <wuchangye@huawei.com>
|
cool. /lgtm |
| bpf_memcpy(kmesh_ctx->dnat_ip.ip6, backend_v->addr.ip6, IPV6_ADDR_LEN); | ||
|
|
||
| kmesh_ctx->dnat_port = service_v->target_port[i]; | ||
| kmesh_ctx->via_waypoint = false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: should we always set false before entering the loop
| static inline int | ||
| backend_manager(struct kmesh_context *kmesh_ctx, backend_value *backend_v, __u32 service_id, service_value *service_v) | ||
| { | ||
| int ret; | ||
| int ret = -ENOENT; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: set error in the error branch
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: hzxuzhonghu The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: