It looks to me this needs to be back ported. But I would like to make sure
the same bug exists on branch-1.11 before applying. What do you think?


On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com> wrote:

> Did you determine whether it should be backported to branch-1.11?
>
> --Justin
>
>
> On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Andy Zhou <az...@nicira.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the review, pushed to master and branch-2.0 with fixes
> suggested.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com>
> wrote:
> > On Dec 11, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Andy Zhou <az...@nicira.com> wrote:
> >
> > > diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> > > index ff77903..8d9a9bd 100644
> > > --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> > > +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> > > @@ -4219,6 +4219,9 @@ facet_revalidate(struct facet *facet)
> > >     xlate_in_init(&xin, ofproto, &facet->flow, new_rule, 0, NULL);
> > >     xlate_actions(&xin, &xout);
> > >     flow_wildcards_or(&xout.wc, &xout.wc, &wc);
> > > +    /* Make sure non packet fields are not masked. If not cleared,
> the memcmp()
> >
> > Nitpicking, but can you make it "non-packet".
> >
> > > +     * below may fail, causing otherwise valid facet to be removed. */
> >
> > Can you add an "an" before "otherwise"?
> >
> > Acked-by: Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com>
> >
> > --Justin
> >
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to