On 08/16/2015 07:24 PM, Alex Wang wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Russell Bryant <rbry...@redhat.com > <mailto:rbry...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > On 08/09/2015 10:50 PM, Alex Wang wrote: > > + tnl_key = port_binding_rec->datapath->tunnel_key; > > + HMAP_FOR_EACH_WITH_HASH (ls_node, hmap_node, > > + hash_uint64((uint64_t) tnl_key), > > + &ls_map) { > > + if (ls_node->vtep_ls->tunnel_key[0] == tnl_key) { > > + break; > > + } > > + } > > + /* If 'ls_node' is NULL, that means no vtep logical switch is > > + * attached to the corresponding ovn logical datapath, so > pass. */ > > + if (!ls_node) { > > + continue; > > + } > > I don't think ls_node is guaranteed to be NULL here, even when the loop > ends normally (without a break). > > > Could you explain more about this concern? From the comments in > lib/hmap.h, this looks okay to me.
Ah, you're right. It's fine since hmap_node is the first member in the struct. Thanks. It might be worth a comment in your struct definition saying that hmap_node must remain the first struct member. -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
