On 10 December 2015 at 13:43, Or Gerlitz <gerlitz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org> wrote: >> On 10 December 2015 at 13:06, Or Gerlitz <gerlitz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org> wrote: > >>>>>> As far as the mask, I briefly discussed this with Jarno and it seems >>>>>> like it could be something as simple as zeroing the ip_ttl mask in >>>>>> tnl_wc_init(). > >>>>> to make sure I follow, will that have the consequence that we (user + >>>>> kernel) will practically not be testing the ttl for these flows? > >>>> Yes, it would cause userspace to 'wildcard' the field so the kernel >>>> flows that are installed will ignore it during lookup. > >>> Cool, any chance this is gonna fit into your schedule to meet 4.4? if >>> not, for 4.5? >>> Also, can the patch be made simple/small enough to go into -stable as well? > >> It's a userspace change. > > > mmm, in a downstream post of this thread [1] Haggai pointed to you > that there's code in the OVS kernel path that that rejects new tunnel > flows if they don't have the TTL mask set, so he's wrong? where? > > Or. > > [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=144880328121156&w=2
The rejection is within an if statement called "if (!is_mask)", so it seems to me like it is enforcing the flow key to specify a TTL value (any), and doesn't care what the mask does. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
