kj> I don't think that we need to pad nxt_set_packet_in_format to a > multiple of 8 bytes.
I thought this was the convention, but apparently nxt_set_flow_format doesn't pad to 8 bytes. So I suppose I'll be consistent with that. > In ofputil_decode_packet_in(), I think that the following fails to > byte-swap in_port or the registers and their masks: >> + pin->fmd.in_port = rule.flow.in_port; >> + >> + pin->fmd.tun_id = rule.flow.tun_id; >> + pin->fmd.tun_id_mask = rule.wc.tun_id_mask; >> + >> + memcpy(pin->fmd.regs, rule.flow.regs, sizeof pin->fmd.regs); >> + memcpy(pin->fmd.reg_masks, rule.wc.reg_masks, >> + sizeof pin->fmd.reg_masks); I'm sorry I don't think I understand this comment. Are you talking about byte order? Or perhaps you are saying that we should be applying the mask to the fmd field? I must be missing something obvious. I'll send out an incremental shortly. Ethan > In ovs-ofctl, I think it would be better to follow the pattern that we > have for e.g. "dump-flows", where by default we try to use the Nicira > extension but fall back to the OpenFlow 1.0 version if it is > unavailable, and allow command-line options to force some particular > version. > > In ovs-ofctl.8, in the documentation for --packet-in-format, I think > we should mention that it affects only the "monitor" and "snoop" > commands. > > Thanks, > > Ben. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
