On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
> 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.
>
ok.
>> > 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?
>
its typo, key_present is right.
Thanks,
Pravin.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
