On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Andy Zhou <az...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> @@ -1317,6 +1326,7 @@ static int metadata_from_nlattrs(struct sw_flow_match
>> *match, u64 *attrs,
>> *attrs &= ~(1ULL << OVS_KEY_ATTR_IN_PORT);
>> } else if (!is_mask) {
>> SW_FLOW_KEY_PUT(match, phy.in_port, DP_MAX_PORTS, is_mask);
>> + SW_FLOW_KEY_PUT(match, phy.in_port, 0xffff, !is_mask);
>
> Can you put this in a separate patch? All of these
> attribute-not-present corner cases are getting really nasty and I
> think that the vlan issues are actually somewhat separate.
Actually, I don't think that this part is right anyways. The fact that
someone implicitly used a 'no-port' input port doesn't inherently mean
that they want to match on it - it could just be part of the packet
that's causing the flow to be set up.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
