Thanks Nithin. Ankur caught it too :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Nithin Raju
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 2:36 PM
To: Eitan Eliahu
Cc: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH 2/4] Upcall NL packet format: NL Flow utilities,
parametrized Key to NL conversion
> /*
> *----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> - * _MapFlowTunKeyToNlKey --
> - * Maps OvsIPv4TunnelKey to OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_ID attribute.
> + * MapFlowTunKeyToNlKey --
> + * Maps OvsIPv4TunnelKey to OVS_TUNNEL_KEY_ATTR_ID attribute.
> *----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> */
> -static NTSTATUS
> -_MapFlowTunKeyToNlKey(PNL_BUFFER nlBuf, OvsIPv4TunnelKey *tunKey)
> +NTSTATUS
> +MapFlowTunKeyToNlKey(PNL_BUFFER nlBuf,
> + OvsIPv4TunnelKey *tunKey,
> + UINT16 tunKeyType)
> {
> NTSTATUS rc = STATUS_SUCCESS;
> UINT32 offset = 0;
>
> - offset = NlMsgStartNested(nlBuf, OVS_KEY_ATTR_TUNNEL);
> + offset = NlMsgStartNested(nlBuf, tunKeyType);
> if (!offset) {
> /* Starting the nested attribute failed. */
> rc = STATUS_UNSUCCESSFUL;
> @@ -2302,4 +2305,43 @@ unlock:
> return status;
> }
>
> +UINT32
> +OvsTunKeyAttrSize(void)
Should these functions not be the other way round? ie. OvsFlowKeyAttrSize()
includes the tunKey as well, rather than OvsTunKeyAttrSize() including
OvsFlowKeyAttrSize()?
Looks good otherwise.
Acked-by: Nithin Raju <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
