On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Yang, Yi <yi.y.y...@intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 07:00:56PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi, Yi Yang.
>> >>
>> >> Before adding the OVS_VXLAN_EXT_GPE extension to the out-of-tree module,
>> >> you
>> >> should send it to the mainline kernel. Besides, you need a very good
>> >> justification why you can't wait for my patchset to be accepted and have
>> >> VXLAN-GPE enabled using rtnetlink.
>> >
>> > Will add VS_VXLAN_EXT_GPE to include/uapi/linux/openvswitch.h and send a
>> > kernel patch, but ovs and net-next kernel also can work together.
>>
>> I think that you might have misunderstood the gist of the suggestion -
>> please do not add this extension. This is pure compatibility code for
>> existing, old features and should not be extended with new things
>> unless there is a very, very good reason (which would almost certainly
>> be related to fixing bugs, not new functionality) - especially since
>> there's already an existing mechanism to do this.
>
> I'm confused, kernel has this header file
> include/uapi/linux/openvswitch.h, but ovs also has this header file
> datapath/linux/compat/include/linux/openvswitch.h, both of them included
> this enumeration definition:
>
> enum {
> OVS_VXLAN_EXT_UNSPEC,
> OVS_VXLAN_EXT_GBP, /* Flag or __u32 */
> __OVS_VXLAN_EXT_MAX,
> };
>
> Don't we need to make sure they are consistent with the below line?
>
> OVS_VXLAN_EXT_GPE, /* Flag, Generic Protocol Extension */
You don't need to add this, either upstream or in the OVS tree. It's
already possible to configure VXLAN GPE through the VXLAN netlink
interface, so that's what you should be using.
When doing backports, please do a straight backport of what is
upstream without adding anything new. I would also like you to layer
this on top of VXLAN previous code that needs to be backported rather
than taking it out of order.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
