On 30 June 2016 at 16:18, Nithin Raju <nit...@vmware.com> wrote:
> >>On 6/24/16, 6:14 PM, "Sairam Venugopal" <vsai...@vmware.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Update the code to use tcp->flags. This keeps the kernel conntrack-tcp.c
> >>>file in sync with userspace version.
> >>>
> >>>This patch also addresses an warning - 'Comparison of a boolean
> >>>expression with an integer other than 0 or 1' - (tcp_flags &
> >>>(TCP_ACK|TCP_RST)) == (TCP_ACK|TCP_RST))
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Sairam Venugopal <vsai...@vmware.com>
> >
> >>>@@ -232,31 +226,33 @@ OvsConntrackUpdateTcpEntry(OVS_CT_ENTRY* conn_,
> >>> /* The peer that should receive 'pkt' */
> >>> struct tcp_peer *dst = &conn->peer[reply ? 0 : 1];
> >>> uint8_t sws = 0, dws = 0;
> >>>+ UINT16 tcp_flags = tcp->flags;
> >>> uint16_t win = ntohs(tcp->window);
> >>> uint32_t ack, end, seq, orig_seq;
> >>> uint32_t p_len = OvsGetTcpPayloadLength(nbl);
> >>> int ackskew;
> >>>
> >>>- if (OvsConntrackValidateTcpFlags(tcp)) {
> >>>+ if (OvsCtInvalidTcpFlags(tcp->flags)) {
> >>> return CT_UPDATE_INVALID;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>- if ((tcp->syn) && dst->state >= CT_DPIF_TCPS_FIN_WAIT_2 &&
> >>>- src->state >= CT_DPIF_TCPS_FIN_WAIT_2) {
> >>>+ if (((tcp_flags & (TCP_SYN|TCP_ACK)) == TCP_SYN)
> >
> >Why do we need to include TCP_ACK in the check?
>
> We spoke offline. This is a bug fix.
>
> Acked-by: Nithin Raju <nit...@vmware.com>
>
I applied this. Thank you!
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev@openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
