On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:13:16PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
Currently we treat the entire NXM/OXM header, including length,
as an ID to define a field. However, this does not allow for
multiple lengths of a particular field.
If a field has been marked as variable, we should ignore the
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Ben Pfaff b...@nicira.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:13:16PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
Currently we treat the entire NXM/OXM header, including length,
as an ID to define a field. However, this does not allow for
multiple lengths of a particular field.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:20:20AM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Ben Pfaff b...@nicira.com wrote:
While reading nxm_field_by_header() I realized that we've got a terrible
existing mistake in our hashing. Ugh. I'll send a fix, which we'll want
to pre-apply (and
Currently we treat the entire NXM/OXM header, including length,
as an ID to define a field. However, this does not allow for
multiple lengths of a particular field.
If a field has been marked as variable, we should ignore the length
when looking up the field and only use the class and field. We
