On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 01:02:19PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>> > 'dp_ifindex' is never used in the fast path, only in Netlink handling
>> > and in the slow path that sends packets that miss u
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 01:02:19PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > 'dp_ifindex' is never used in the fast path, only in Netlink handling
> > and in the slow path that sends packets that miss up to userspace. ??We
> > could get rid of dp_ifindex, re
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:50:16PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> It's possible to start receiving packets on a datapath as soon as
>> the internal device is created. It's therefore important that the
>> datapath be fully initialized before this,
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:50:16PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> It's possible to start receiving packets on a datapath as soon as
> the internal device is created. It's therefore important that the
> datapath be fully initialized before this, which it currently isn't.
> In particularly, the fact th
It's possible to start receiving packets on a datapath as soon as
the internal device is created. It's therefore important that the
datapath be fully initialized before this, which it currently isn't.
In particularly, the fact that dp->stats_percpu is not yet set is
potentially fatal. In addition
