Hi Ben, Thank you, I will fix it and resubmit together with the truncate patch.
Regards, William > On Jun 6, 2016, at 9:50 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > >> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 11:22:10AM -0700, William Tu wrote: >> This patch adds a 'snaplen' config for mirroring table. A mirrored packet >> with size larger than snaplen bytes will be truncated in datapath before >> sending to the mirror output port. A snaplen of 0 equals 65535, which means >> no truncation applied. >> >> The patch depends on packet truncation patch: >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/626486/ >> >> Signed-off-by: William Tu <u9012...@gmail.com> > > This seems quite reasonable once we're happy with the packet truncation > patch. > > Usually, when one patch depends on another, we send both out as a > series, to ensure that they are kept together. > > The indentation of the second line here looks wrong: > if (ctx->mirror_snaplen != 0 && > ctx->mirror_snaplen != (uint16_t) - 1) { > I would write it as: > if (ctx->mirror_snaplen != 0 && > ctx->mirror_snaplen != (uint16_t) - 1) { > > Also it looks funny to me to write a space after the unary operator -. > I would write UINT16_MAX instead of "(uint16_t) - 1". > > Thanks, > > Ben. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
