I forgot to mention that this is the first post based against net-next.
On 2 December 2014 at 18:56, Joe Stringer <joestrin...@nicira.com> wrote:
> <....snip...>
> diff --git a/net/openvswitch/flow.h b/net/openvswitch/flow.h
> index a8b30f3..7f31dbf 100644
> --- a/net/openvswitch/flow.h
> +++ b/net/openvswitch/flow.h
> @@ -197,6 +197,13 @@ struct sw_flow_match {
> struct sw_flow_mask *mask;
> };
>
> +#define MAX_UFID_LENGTH 256
> +
> +struct sw_flow_id {
> + u32 ufid_len;
> + u32 ufid[MAX_UFID_LENGTH / 4];
> +};
> +
> struct sw_flow_actions {
> struct rcu_head rcu;
> u32 actions_len;
Pravin, I changed the 'struct sw_flow_id' to the above after feedback
from the previous round, but it doesn't seem quite right. Is this what
you meant? Given that current ovs-vswitchd userspace only generates
128bit UFIDs, it seems wasteful to be allocating so much for this. Did
you have in mind for this to be united with the unmasked_key?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
