>> Signed-off-by: Wenyu Zhang <[email protected]>
>> Acked-by: Romain Lenglet <[email protected]>
>
> This patch renumbers OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_OAM and
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_GENEVE_OPTS. Is that really OK?
>
It is not ok.
There are another fixes to kernel part which I was going to do before pushing
this patch to master.
Thanks,
Pravin.
Wenyu: I can move the new items after OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_GENEVE_OPTS if it is
not OK.
And I am wondering why it is not OK? Is there any case that the renumbering
will cause issue?
Thanks a lot.
> @@ -338,10 +345,12 @@ enum ovs_tunnel_key_attr {
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_IPV4_DST, /* be32 dst IP address. */
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_TOS, /* u8 Tunnel IP ToS. */
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_TTL, /* u8 Tunnel IP TTL. */
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_DONT_FRAGMENT, /* No argument, set DF. */
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_CSUM, /* No argument. CSUM packet.
> */
> + OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_TP_SRC, /* be16 src Transport Port. */
> + OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_TP_DST, /* be16 dst Transport Port. */
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_OAM, /* No argument, OAM frame. */
> OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_GENEVE_OPTS, /* Array of Geneve options */
> __OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_MAX
> };
> #define OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_MAX (__OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_MAX - 1)
>
> I'm continuing to look at it.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
