On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 09:32:35AM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > On Oct 4, 2011, at 9:18 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 10:10:17PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > >> Feature #7527 > > > > It looks good. > > > > I'm not sure that we really need to increment FLOW_WC_SEQ, because > > only the number of registers changed. (I see that nothing near a > > build assertion on FLOW_WC_SEQ had to change, just the build > > assertions themselves.) > > Right. I only updated it because the comment describing FLOW_WC_SEQ > contained the following line and I didn't want to break the convention: > > This sequence number should be incremented whenever anything > involving flows or the wildcarding of flows changes. > > Do you think we should update the comment to be more narrow?
Well, I guess you could say that if the increment didn't actually find anything to change then you can feel free to decrement it right back. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
