> On 3 April 2014 20:54, YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamam...@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
>
>> > On 3 April 2014 10:16, Joe Stringer <joestrin...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I had noticed that this logic was in the codepath for when we delete a
>> >> flow from the datapath, but not in this codepath. Thanks for picking
>> this
>> >> up!
>> >>
>> >
>> > On second thought, I suppose that this means that we will expire the
>> > netflow immediately when we discover that the flow is invalid, rather
>> than
>> > when we delete the flow. How does this impact netflow logging for traffic
>> > on the flow between the time that the flow is revalidated up until the
>> flow
>> > is deleted?
>>
>> i'm not sure if i understand what you mean.
>>
>> the only caller of revalidate_ukey looks like the following.
>>
>> if (!revalidate_ukey(udpif, udump, ukey)) {
>> dpif_flow_del(udpif->dpif, udump->key, udump->key_len, NULL);
>> ukey_delete(revalidator, ukey);
>> }
>>
>> ie. "when we discover that the flow is invalid" (revalidate_ukey returns
>> false)
>> and "when we delete the flow" (dpif_flow_del) are almost same.
>>
>> ideally we should use stats from dpif_flow_del, though.
>> do you mean this?
>
>
> Sorry, I was mistaken. I have been working on patches in this area and did
> not look back at master to see how it currently works. I was referring to
> push_dump_ops(), which is deliberately not used in this case.
>
> I think that your patch is also applicable to branch-2.1.
is there any special procedures when pushing to release branches?
YAMAMOTO Takashi
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
