Suppress a gcc warning which was introduced by
commit e0b48482c16b6eaa7f14d8c7e7c6275528881b9e.
("util: create a copy of program_name")
I guess MSVC doesn't have a corresponding warning.
Signed-off-by: YAMAMOTO Takashi
---
lib/util.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --
On 7/4/14, 12:51 AM, Ansis Atteka wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 02:03:15PM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote:
From: Ansis
Commit 8a9562 ("dpif-netdev: Add DPDK netdev.") reversed sequence
in which set_program_name() and proctitle_init() functions ar
Change the interface to allow implementations to pass back a buffer, and
allow callers to specify which of actions, mask, and stats they wish to
receive. This will be used in the next commit.
Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer
---
v3: Set *bufp to NULL before calling ->flow_get().
Allocate the corre
On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 12:15:58PM +1200, Joe Stringer wrote:
> Thanks for the review,
>
> On 4 July 2014 11:53, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 12:29:25PM +1200, Joe Stringer wrote:
> > > Change the interface to allow implementations to pass back a buffer, and
> > > allow callers
Thanks for the review,
On 4 July 2014 11:53, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 12:29:25PM +1200, Joe Stringer wrote:
> > Change the interface to allow implementations to pass back a buffer, and
> > allow callers to specify which of actions, mask, and stats they wish to
> > receive. This
With that change,
Acked-by: Ben Pfaff
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 02:46:20PM +1200, Joe Stringer wrote:
> The handle_missed_revalidation() call is inverse from what I had intended:
>
> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c
> index 9c2a8a4..70f9a43 100644
> --- a/
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 12:29:25PM +1200, Joe Stringer wrote:
> Change the interface to allow implementations to pass back a buffer, and
> allow callers to specify which of actions, mask, and stats they wish to
> receive. This will be used in the next commit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer
I th
Occasionally, this test would fail, with some of the ports reporting
"may_enable: false" in the bond/show output. This commit fixes the race
condition by waiting for may_enable to be true for all bond ports.
Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer
---
Running the test in a tight loop could cause this failure
It seems I was too invested in the combined refcount/RCU case here. I still
think that with RCU postponed destruction relaxed is the proper memory model.
So maybe we should add a relaxed variant of the unref function to be used with
RCU objects and make the normal unref use release to guarantee
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 02:03:15PM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote:
>> From: Ansis
>>
>> Commit 8a9562 ("dpif-netdev: Add DPDK netdev.") reversed sequence
>> in which set_program_name() and proctitle_init() functions are
>> called. This introduced a
On 3 July 2014 18:27, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2014, at 8:22 PM, Joe Stringer wrote:
>
> In dpif_linux_operate__(), I think that it is unnecessary to put
>
> NLM_F_ECHO in the message flags.
>
> I do not think that the code in dpif_linux_operate__() is safe. It
> looks to me like th
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:17:19AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> Add support for atomic compare_exchange operations.
>
> Add ovs_refcount_try_ref(), which takes a reference only if the
> refcount is non-zero and returns true if a reference was taken, false
> otherwise. This can be used in combi
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:17:18AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> Updating the reference count only requires atomicity, but no memory
> ordering with respect to any other loads or stores. Avoiding the
> overhead of the default memory_order_seq_cst can make these more
> efficient.
>
> Signed-off-
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 01:47:38PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:17:17AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> > This requires less locking and makes lockless classifier use a simpler.
>
> "a simpler" => "simpler"?
> "a simpler" => "possible"? ;-)
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajah
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:17:17AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> This requires less locking and makes lockless classifier use a simpler.
"a simpler" => "simpler"?
"a simpler" => "possible"? ;-)
> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme
I think that, under the new locking rules, dpif_netdev_flow_get()
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 08:41:49PM -0700, Wenyu Zhang wrote:
> Extend IPFIX exporter to export tunnel headers when both input and output
> of the port.
> Add three other_config options in IPFIX table: enable-input-sampling,
> enable-output-sampling and enable-tunnel-sampling, to control whether
> s
On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 08:37:25PM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote:
> From: Ansis
Fix up the patch author?
> The child process (the one being monitored) could die before it was able
> to call fork_notify_startup() function. If such situation arises, then
> parent process (the one monitoring child pro
On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 02:03:15PM -0700, Ansis Atteka wrote:
> From: Ansis
>
> Commit 8a9562 ("dpif-netdev: Add DPDK netdev.") reversed sequence
> in which set_program_name() and proctitle_init() functions are
> called. This introduced a regression where program_name and argv_start
> would poin
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:50:24AM -0700, Gurucharan Shetty wrote:
> Till now, we were initializing 'unix_epoch' through time_init().
> But if there was a call directly to xgettimeofday(), we would
> miss the initialization causing overflows. This commit fixes it
> by pre-calculating the value and
Following patch enables all available tunnel GSO features for OVS
bridge device so that ovs can use hardware offloads available to
underling device.
Signed-off-by: Pravin B Shelar
---
v1-v2:
This patch checks for kernel version rather than supported
features.
---
.../linux/compat/include/linux/n
On Jul 2, 2014, at 8:22 PM, Joe Stringer wrote:
>> In dpif_linux_operate__(), I think that it is unnecessary to put
>> NLM_F_ECHO in the message flags.
>>
>> I do not think that the code in dpif_linux_operate__() is safe. It
>> looks to me like the reply is constructed in a stub on the stack (
21 matches
Mail list logo
