On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 03:54:54PM -0700, Pravin Shelar wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 06:41:06PM -0700, Pravin B Shelar wrote: > > In ovs_tnl_send(), can this case happen? I'm a little surprised: > > if (!daddr) { > > /* Trying to sent packet from Null-port without > > * tunnel info? Drop this packet. */ > > err = VPORT_E_TX_DROPPED; > > goto error_free; > > } > > > It is possible if vswitchd generate incorrect action. Can we assume > that kernel will never get wrong actions?
I mean, I don't think null ports exist as of this commit. I think they only get added in patch 3, so I think that we only need to add this test in patch 3. > > The use of key_preset in capwap_rcv() seems suspicious. It is > > initially false and it may be set to true by the call to > > process_capwap_proto(), but this value is never used, instead it is > > always thrown away and replaced by: > > if (mutable->flags & TNL_F_IN_KEY_MATCH) > > key_preset = true; > > else > > key_preset = false; > > later in the function. > > > right, I need to check for key_present here. Is the correct name key_preset or key_present? Thanks, Ben. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev