On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery)
<kmest...@cisco.com>wrote:
>
> On Nov 6, 2012, at 6:50 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
>
> > Tunnel ports now always include full outer IP information, even if
> > userspace can't understand it. Since our flows our exact match this
> > information must also be provided when setting up flows. Since flows
> > with only OVS_KEY_ATTR_TUN_ID keys don't contain all of this information
> > they can never be hit and we should just reject them at setup time.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com>
> > ---
> > datapath/flow.c | 13 ++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/datapath/flow.c b/datapath/flow.c
> > index 2acdd05..f33760a 100644
> > --- a/datapath/flow.c
> > +++ b/datapath/flow.c
> > @@ -1041,14 +1041,11 @@ int ovs_flow_from_nlattrs(struct sw_flow_key
> *swkey, int *key_lenp,
> > if (tun_id != tun_key->tun_id)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - memcpy(&swkey->phy.tun.tun_key, tun_key,
> sizeof(swkey->phy.tun.tun_key));
> > - attrs &= ~(1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_TUN_ID);
> > - attrs &= ~(1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_IPV4_TUNNEL);
> > - } else if (attrs & (1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_TUN_ID)) {
> > - swkey->phy.tun.tun_key.tun_id =
> nla_get_be64(a[OVS_KEY_ATTR_TUN_ID]);
> > - swkey->phy.tun.tun_key.tun_flags |= OVS_FLOW_TNL_F_KEY;
> > + memcpy(&swkey->phy.tun.tun_key, tun_key,
> > + sizeof(swkey->phy.tun.tun_key));
> >
> > attrs &= ~(1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_TUN_ID);
> > + attrs &= ~(1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_IPV4_TUNNEL);
> > } else if (attrs & (1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_IPV4_TUNNEL)) {
> > struct ovs_key_ipv4_tunnel *tun_key;
> > tun_key = nla_data(a[OVS_KEY_ATTR_IPV4_TUNNEL]);
> > @@ -1056,7 +1053,9 @@ int ovs_flow_from_nlattrs(struct sw_flow_key
> *swkey, int *key_lenp,
> > if (!tun_key->ipv4_dst)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - memcpy(&swkey->phy.tun.tun_key, tun_key,
> sizeof(swkey->phy.tun.tun_key));
> > + memcpy(&swkey->phy.tun.tun_key, tun_key,
> > + sizeof(swkey->phy.tun.tun_key));
> > +
>
> Why is this change needed?
Which part? The whole thing or just the line wrap immediately above?
The idea of the patch is just to reject flows that can't possibly be
correct to catch problems early. The line wrap is just cosmetic to fit on
80 characters - there shouldn't be any actual changes.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
