On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Joe Stringer <joestrin...@nicira.com> wrote:
> On 19 November 2014 15:34, Pravin Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Joe Stringer <joestrin...@nicira.com>
>> wrote:
>>> @@ -684,33 +691,43 @@ static size_t ovs_flow_cmd_msg_size(const struct
>>> sw_flow_actions *acts)
>>>
>>> /* Called with ovs_mutex or RCU read lock. */
>>> static int ovs_flow_cmd_fill_match(const struct sw_flow *flow,
>>> - struct sk_buff *skb)
>>> + struct sk_buff *skb, u32 ufid_flags)
>>> {
>>> struct nlattr *nla;
>>> int err;
>>>
>>> - /* Fill flow key. */
>>> - nla = nla_nest_start(skb, OVS_FLOW_ATTR_KEY);
>>> - if (!nla)
>>> - return -EMSGSIZE;
>>> -
>>> - err = ovs_nla_put_flow(&flow->unmasked_key, &flow->unmasked_key,
>>> skb,
>>> - false);
>>> - if (err)
>>> - return err;
>>> -
>>> - nla_nest_end(skb, nla);
>>> + /* Fill flow key. If userspace didn't specify a UFID, then ignore
>>> the
>>> + * OMIT_KEY flag. */
>>> + if (!(ufid_flags & OVS_UFID_F_OMIT_KEY) ||
>>> + !flow->index_by_ufid) {
>>
>> I am not sure about this check, userspace needs to send atleast ufid
>> or the unmasked key as id for flow. otherwise we shld flag error. Here
>> we can serialize flow->key.
>> There could be another function which takes care of flow-id
>> serialization where we serialize use ufid or unmasked key as flow id.
>> Lets group ufid and unmasked key together rather than masked key and
>> unmasked key which are not related.
>
> Let me start from scratch and see if this is what you're saying.
>
> fill_id() would serialize the UFID or unmasked key if UFID is not available.
> fill_key() would serialize the masked key if !(ufid_flags &
> OVS_UFID_F_OMIT_KEY) and UFID was provided (but not when the UFID is
> missing).
> fill_mask() would serialize the mask if !(ufid_flags & OVS_UFID_F_OMIT_MASK).
>
> I see key and id as related, because the flow_key serves as both the
> "match" and the "id" in the non-ufid case, so we need to know the same
> piece of information in both functions to ensure we don't serialize
> the key twice.
Lets follow new model where ID and key are two separate attributes. I
agree we also need to check for ufid in key serialization function to
handle compatibility code. Keeping masked and unmasked key separate is
easier to understand.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
