[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACXxYfxfkuo_EOa3TgBC7+iBXFckV3_csvUvLMN3VdfYPCkFQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2023 13:40:05 -0700
From: Abhijeet Rastogi <abhijeet.1989@...il.com>
To: Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
coreteam@...filter.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipvs: change ip_vs_conn_tab_bits range to [8,31]
> One way to solve the problem is to use in Kconfig:
>
> range 8 20 if !64BIT
> range 8 27 if 64BIT
Thanks @Julian Anastasov. I appreciate the detailed response around
why these limits exist. Personally, I won't be able to own the task of
making these checks more intelligent, but for now, I wonder if it
would be okay to accept the range increase to 27.
I am sending a v2 patch to set a higher limit to 27.
Thanks,
Abhijeet
Powered by blists - more mailing lists