On Oct 31, 2014, at 2:24 PM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 02:17:56PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>> Classifier users should not use negative priorities.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <[email protected]>
>
> The only priority that the classifier can't handle properly is
> INT_MIN. Unfortunately, that's also the one priority that this patch
> doesn't fix (since -INT_MIN == INT_MIN, at least on the system we care
> about).
>
Oops, did not think of that!
>> + cls_rule_init(&rule->cls_rule, &match, wc_fields
>> + ? (priority < 0 ? -priority: priority)
>> + : INT_MAX);
How about this:
cls_rule_init(&rule->cls_rule, &match, wc_fields
? (priority == INT_MIN ? priority + 1 : priority)
: INT_MAX);
Jarno
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
