On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@kernel.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:59 PM, pravin shelar <pshe...@ovn.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:53 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@kernel.org> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Pravin B Shelar <pshe...@ovn.org> wrote: >>>> diff --git a/datapath/linux/compat/include/net/udp.h >>>> b/datapath/linux/compat/include/net/udp.h >>>> index fa49fa5..266e70a 100644 >>>> --- a/datapath/linux/compat/include/net/udp.h >>>> +++ b/datapath/linux/compat/include/net/udp.h >>>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static inline __sum16 udp_v4_check(int len, __be32 saddr, >>>> } >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> -#ifndef HAVE_UDP_SET_CSUM >>>> +#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(3,18,0) >>> >>> I'm a little nervous about these version checks being hard to maintain >>> - especially since they don't correspond to anything obvious in this >>> function upstream. Maybe we could just declare a #define with a name >>> that would make it clearer. That might actually be useful in any case >>> since I suspect that we will start seeing some backports in >>> distributions that will allow us to avoid doing OVS segmentation even >>> on older kernels. >> >> Is it fine if I do it as part of separate patch? This patch is about >> fixing the UDP checksum issue. And the requested change is about >> general code improvement. > > Yes, that's fine. I think we'll want to convert all of the GSO related > 3.18 version checks to use this symbol, so that's mostly not related > to checksums anyways. > > Acked-by: Jesse Gross <je...@kernel.org>
Thanks for reviews, I pushed this series to master. I also pushed first two patches to branch 2.5. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
