On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Pravin Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Pravin B Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> wrote:
>>> @@ -409,9 +373,14 @@ dpif_linux_port_add(struct dpif *dpif_, struct netdev
>>> *netdev,
>>> *port_nop = reply.port_no;
>>> VLOG_DBG("%s: assigning port %"PRIu32" to netlink pid %"PRIu32,
>>> dpif_name(dpif_), request.port_no, upcall_pid);
>>> + } else if (error == EFBIG) {
>>> + /* Older datapath has lower limit. */
>>> + max_ports = dpif->alloc_port_no;
>>> + dpif->alloc_port_no = 0;
>>
>> Port number zero will never be available since it is the local port.
>> It would be better if we started at 1 (both initially and on wrap
>> around).
>
> right, thats why increment done before assigning to request.port_no.
I see, thanks.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
