On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 11:25:53AM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> - bool send_flow_removed; /* Send a flow removed message? */
> + int send_flow_removed:1, /* Send a flow removed message? */
> + has_resubmit:1; /* Rule contains resubmit action. */
Leaving the rest of this patch aside for the moment (I think that
Ethan is planning to review it in detail), let me address this
specific part. "int" bit-fields are a weird corner case in the C
standard, which says:
...for bit-fields, it is implementation-defined whether the
specifier "int" designates the same type as "signed int" or the
same type as "unsigned int".
This means that a 1-bit "int" bit-field might only be able to
represent the values -1 and 0.
My conclusion has always been that one should never use "int" as the
type of a bit-field member, only "unsigned int" (or "signed int", I
guess, but I've never had a need for a signed bit-field member).
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
