On 6/21/21 11:20, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> For patch ports, the is_last_action value is not propagated and is
> always set to true. This causes non-reversible actions to modify the
> packet, and the original content is not preserved when processing
> the remaining actions.
>
> This patch propagates
On 5 Jan 2022, at 15:35, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 1/3/22 11:19, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>> Hi Ilya,
>>
>> As you reviewed the v1, I’m wondering if this can get into the next release?
>
> Hi. Sorry, this one fell through the cracks.
No problem, same here, I noticed it when picking up some relate
On 1/3/22 11:19, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> Hi Ilya,
>
> As you reviewed the v1, I’m wondering if this can get into the next release?
Hi. Sorry, this one fell through the cracks.
It seems to be a bug fix, so we'll need to backport it anyway.
I'll try to get to this patch in a near future.
Best reg
Hi Ilya,
As you reviewed the v1, I’m wondering if this can get into the next release?
I've also added the original authors of the fixes patches; maybe they can
review?
Eelco
On 21 Jun 2021, at 11:20, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> For patch ports, the is_last_action value is not propagated and is
>
For patch ports, the is_last_action value is not propagated and is
always set to true. This causes non-reversible actions to modify the
packet, and the original content is not preserved when processing
the remaining actions.
This patch propagates the is_last_action flag for patch port related
acti
