On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 04:00:55PM -0800, Jesse Gross wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >> > On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 12:34:25PM -0800, Jesse Gross wrote: >> >> The interfaces related to tunneling aren't finalized enough to be >> >> sent upstream but we also still want to retain them in the OVS >> >> repository. ??Since userspace should be compatible with both versions >> >> of the kernel, this renumbers the tunnel interfaces to high numbers >> >> so that we can continue to add new interfaces without conflict. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> >> > >> > We have arrays sized on some of these values. ??I have a series out >> > that uses policy parsing for key attributes in userspace, so this is >> > going to require changes in that series, and I was planning to do the >> > same thing in the kernel. ??However I don't see a better way to do it >> > yet, so... >> >> This definitely results in some unfortunate waste of space though I >> don't see really see an alternative. The thing that I was most >> concerned about was kernel stack space, which at the moment, at least, >> this doesn't affect. What would you change in response to this? > > I don't have a better approach to suggest yet, so I think you might as > well go ahead and push it. > > In userspace, maybe we would move to hashing the attribute number, > somehow, for policy parsing.
It's worth thinking about (though even better would be to avoid these interface forks altogether, which is doable over time). I pushed this series for now though. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
