Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 07:32:08AM CEST, f.faine...@gmail.com wrote:
>On 09/19/14 06:49, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>This patch adds basic support for flows. The infrastructure is prepared
>>to easily add another flow matching types. So far, only the key one is
>>implemented.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us>
>>---
>
>[snip]
>
>>
>>+struct swdev_flow_match_key {
>>+     struct {
>>+             u32     priority;       /* Packet QoS priority. */
>>+             u32     in_port_ifindex; /* Input switch port ifindex (or 0). */
>>+     } phy;
>>+     struct {
>>+             u8     src[ETH_ALEN];   /* Ethernet source address. */
>>+             u8     dst[ETH_ALEN];   /* Ethernet destination address. */
>>+             __be16 tci;             /* 0 if no VLAN, VLAN_TAG_PRESENT set 
>>otherwise. */
>
>Humm, how about QinQ here? I would provision two more 16 bits fields so we
>can do all sorts of VLAN matching.
>
>You might want to allow for a 4 to 8 bytes hardware switch tag as well.

Note this structure is not carved in stone and can be easily adjusted
without any problems any time. So when the time comes and the changes
you are describing will be needed, we can do it.


>
>>+             __be16 type;            /* Ethernet frame type. */
>>+     } eth;
>>+     struct {
>>+             u8     proto;           /* IP protocol or lower 8 bits of ARP 
>>opcode. */
>>+             u8     tos;             /* IP ToS. */
>>+             u8     ttl;             /* IP TTL/hop limit. */
>>+             u8     frag;            /* One of OVS_FRAG_TYPE_*. */
>
>Options might be missing?
>
>[snip]
>
>>+
>>+static void print_flow(const struct swdev_flow *flow, struct net_device *dev,
>>+                    const char *comment)
>>+{
>>+     pr_debug("%s flow %s:\n", dev->name, comment);
>>+     print_flow_match(&flow->match);
>>+     print_flow_actions(flow->action, flow->action_count);
>>+}
>
>I am really not sure how much of this valuable besides early (as in, right
>now) debugging, don't we rather want a generic way to dump a given flow under
>a its native netlink format, does that code has to be here in the first
>place?

Hmm, I think you have a point here, let me think about that.

>--
>Florian
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to