On 08/25/14 18:11, Thomas Graf wrote:
First of all, thanks for the animated discussion, wouldn't
want to miss our arguments ;-)
Passion is key my friend;-> It is said that ancient Greeks
would ask of a person whose funeral they are thinking to attend
"was s/he passionate in life?" And if the answer is negative
they simply dont show up;->
On 08/25/14 at 12:48pm, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
On 08/25/14 10:54, Thomas Graf wrote:
I would argue that swflow is a superset of a Netlink route. It
may infact be very useful to extend the API with something that
understands the Netlink representation of a route and have the
API translate that to a classifier that can be offloaded.
Sorry Thomas, I disagree.
A route has a lot more knobs than just a simple flow representation.
We are talking next hops (of which there could be multiple) etc.
There is no way you can boil that down to a simple flow representation.
I would be tagging along with you guys for flows if you:
a) allow for different classifiers. This allows me to implement
u32 and offload it.
Agreed. What you seem to disagree on is:
- ndo_add_type1([...])
- ndo_add_type2([...])
- ndo_add_type3([...])
vs.
- ndo_add_classifier(type, [...])
Only for what you call a "flow" - mostly because you have decided
on the universal classifier (lets call it THEONE).
Implementation-wise, you dont have to pass a type. It could be
a sub-ops() function pointer.
cheers,
jamal
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
