On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 05:02:15PM +0300, Lorand Jakab wrote:
> diff --git a/lib/flow.c b/lib/flow.c
> index 9c9adc5..2b87309 100644
> --- a/lib/flow.c
> +++ b/lib/flow.c
> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ struct mf_ctx {
> * away. Some GCC versions gave warnigns on ALWAYS_INLINE, so these are
> * defined as macros. */
>
> -#if (FLOW_WC_SEQ != 26)
> +#if (FLOW_WC_SEQ != 27)
> #define MINIFLOW_ASSERT(X) ovs_assert(X)
> #else
> #define MINIFLOW_ASSERT(X)
Jarno, I noticed this reviewing Lorand's patch. It seems odd to me.
Why do we do ovs_assert() only if the sequence number is wrong? I see
there is a big comment but I still don't understand.
Here's the full code code for those of you following along at home:
/* miniflow_push_* macros allow filling in a miniflow data values in order.
* Assertions are needed only when the layout of the struct flow is modified.
* 'ofs' is a compile-time constant, which allows most of the code be optimized
* away. Some GCC versions gave warnigns on ALWAYS_INLINE, so these are
* defined as macros. */
#if (FLOW_WC_SEQ != 27)
#define MINIFLOW_ASSERT(X) ovs_assert(X)
#else
#define MINIFLOW_ASSERT(X)
#endif
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
