Looks good. It might be nice to add a comment stating that only tunnel uses
mark right now, since it's not inherent that mark's are specific to tunnels.
It might act as a good reminder later if/when we use mark other places.
Acked-by: Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com>
Thanks!
--Justin
On Aug 1, 2013, at 1:36 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
> The tunnel lookup uses the skb_mark as part of the port find process
> but it isn't unmasked along with the other fields. This adds it to
> the list of significant fields.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com>
> ---
> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c
> index 18b0257..6672b46 100644
> --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c
> +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c
> @@ -2327,6 +2327,7 @@ xlate_actions(struct xlate_in *xin, struct xlate_out
> *xout)
>
> if (tnl_port_should_receive(&ctx.xin->flow)) {
> memset(&wc->masks.tunnel, 0xff, sizeof wc->masks.tunnel);
> + memset(&wc->masks.skb_mark, 0xff, sizeof wc->masks.skb_mark);
> }
> if (ctx.xbridge->has_netflow) {
> netflow_mask_wc(flow, wc);
> --
> 1.8.1.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev@openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
