> On Mar 24, 2015, at 9:38 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 06:03:25PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme
>
> I think that most of this is code refactoring that should cause visible
> change in behavior, with the exception of this change:
>
>> @@ -
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 06:03:25PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme
I think that most of this is code refactoring that should cause visible
change in behavior, with the exception of this change:
> @@ -2731,6 +2739,7 @@ compose_output_action__(struct xlate_ctx *ctx,
> On Mar 20, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
>
> I'm a little confused about the motivation for this change.
>
> IIRC the idea of having recirculation fields in the xlate_ctx structure was
> to avoid having to pass around extra function parameters, like the ones
> this patch adds. I'm not
I'm a little confused about the motivation for this change.
IIRC the idea of having recirculation fields in the xlate_ctx structure was
to avoid having to pass around extra function parameters, like the ones
this patch adds. I'm not necessarily opposed to that. But I think it is
worth adding some
Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme
---
ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c | 66 +-
ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.h |6
2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c
index 0e28c77..
