Thanks for the review. Pushed to branch-2.0 with the comment fix folded in.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Alex Wang <al...@nicira.com> wrote:
> I see, there is no revalidator thread in branch-2.0
>
> Looks good to me,
>
> May also make sense to remove the "revalidator" from comment,
>
> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
> index 7ec7e8d..6adc78e 100644
> --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
> +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
> @@ -224,8 +224,8 @@ void
> udpif_synchronize(struct udpif *udpif)
> {
> /* This is stronger than necessary. It would be sufficient to ensure
> - * (somehow) that each handler and revalidator thread had passed
> through
> - * its main loop once. */
> + * (somehow) that each handler thread had passed through its main
> + * loop once. */
> size_t n_handlers = udpif->n_handlers;
> if (n_handlers) {
> udpif_recv_set(udpif, 0, false);
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
