Sounds good to me, thanks. Ethan
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 09:01, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 04:05:20PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: >> It seems odd to me that we call it 'may_add_flows' in facet_account, >> and 'do_learn_action' in action_xlate_ctx. I'd be inclined to call >> both of them the same thing. It strikes me, that an appropriate name >> for the flag may be "may_flow_mod" as that's the behavior we actually >> care about. If we add actions in the future which flow_mod, this flag >> would still be applicable. > > Fair enough. I changed them both to "may_flow_mod". I also changed > "do_learn_macs" to "may_learn_macs". > >> Am I correct that this patch prevents leftover packets in the datapath >> from updating the timeouts in learned actions in some cases? e.g. if >> you change the actions of a rule, packets which applied to the old >> rule may not be properly accounted? This seems like a fine trade-off, >> just wanted to make sure I understand it. > > Yes, that's correct. I added this to the commit message: > > This commit has a side effect that leftover unaccounted packets no longer > update the timeouts in MAC learning actions in some cases, when the facets > that cause updates are deleted. At most one second of updates should be > lost. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
