Re: [ovs-discuss] group stats bit in capabilities inside OFPT_FEATURES_REPLY

2014-10-20 Thread Ben Pfaff
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:25:40PM -0400, Anup Khadka wrote: > Seeing this in OVS 2.1 encounter (but looks like the code is same now too) > > The group stats bit is set to false in capabilities inside > OFPT_FEATURES_REPLY. > > Is there a reason why that's done, despite the fact that there is alr

Re: [ovs-discuss] Make ovs locks no-op

2014-10-20 Thread Ben Pfaff
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:43:52PM -0400, Anup Khadka wrote: > I am interested to know if there is a simple way to make the OVS lock > functions (ovs_mutex_lock, etc.) essentially no-ops. You could implement them as no-ops. ___ discuss mailing list discu

Re: [ovs-discuss] Problem with set tunnel id action in ovs

2014-10-20 Thread Ben Pfaff
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 02:10:27PM +, Tomer Pearl wrote: > Hello OVS community, > > I'm using Opendaylight controller and trying to set an action in a flow that > will set the tun_id field of packets that are going through a VxLAN tunnel. > > I'm receiving the following error in the ovs-vswi

Re: [ovs-discuss] group stats bit in capabilities inside OFPT_FEATURES_REPLY

2014-10-20 Thread Anup Khadka
This is something I have been doing as a temporary workaround (the code wrapped inside ifdef ANUP_EXTENSION). But, I am not sure if the aim was to handle this somewhere else, and I am missing something. features.capabilities = (OFPUTIL_C_FLOW_STATS | OFPUTIL_C_TABLE_STATS |

[ovs-discuss] Make ovs locks no-op

2014-10-20 Thread Anup Khadka
I am interested to know if there is a simple way to make the OVS lock functions (ovs_mutex_lock, etc.) essentially no-ops. Thank you, Anup ___ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[ovs-discuss] group stats bit in capabilities inside OFPT_FEATURES_REPLY

2014-10-20 Thread Anup Khadka
Seeing this in OVS 2.1 encounter (but looks like the code is same now too) The group stats bit is set to false in capabilities inside OFPT_FEATURES_REPLY. Is there a reason why that's done, despite the fact that there is already support for group stats? Looking at the git source right now (funct

Re: [ovs-discuss] Possible double-free on ofproto.c:delete_flows_loose

2014-10-20 Thread Ben Pfaff
I applied this commit to branch-2.1 and it will be in the next release from that branch. Sorry it took me so long to get back to this. On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 05:17:17PM -0400, Anup Khadka wrote: > Yes, I got a crash with 100 rules which led me to inspect the code. > > The collect_rule function