Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

flow: Add cfg for optional flow reuse during low memory #10580

Closed

Conversation

coledishington
Copy link
Contributor

By default, force flow reuse to reuse an existing flows no matter the state of the flow.

Add a configuration option flow.force-reuse, enabled by default, that can turn off the above behavior.

Ticket: #6293

Make sure these boxes are signed before submitting your Pull Request -- thank you.

Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/6293

Describe changes:
Add a configuration option flow.force-reuse, enabled by default, that can turn off flow reuse in low memory situations.

Provide values to any of the below to override the defaults.

SV_BRANCH=pr/1684

By default, force flow reuse to reuse an existing flows no matter
the state of the flow.

Add a configuration option flow.force-reuse, enabled by default, that
can turn off the above behaviour.

Ticket: OISF#6293
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 5, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.78%. Comparing base (4afaadc) to head (12ff5f3).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #10580      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.74%   82.78%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         924      924              
  Lines      247401   247410       +9     
==========================================
+ Hits       204719   204826     +107     
+ Misses      42682    42584      -98     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 64.10% <61.53%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
suricata-verify 61.98% <100.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
unittests 62.18% <84.61%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@coledishington
Copy link
Contributor Author

Replaced by #10585 to trigger re-test of new suricata-verify changes in OISF/suricata-verify#1688.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant