I forgot to add that I'm going to resend out the series, since your suggestions had a large ripple effect.
--Justin On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Justin Pettit wrote: > On Nov 7, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > >> kernel >> ------ >> >> Do you plan to use the top 6 bits of ip.frag for something later on? >> If not, I think we can drop all the bitwise manipulation that assumes >> that something might be in those bits, get rid of OVS_FRAG_TYPE_MASK, >> etc. > > My thinking was that currently it only holds fragment flags, but we may want > to use it for other flags later. After discussing off-line with you and > Jesse, none of us had a strong preference for leaving the masks or taking > them out. I've gone ahead and removed them, since they'd probably need some > revisiting even if we did add new flags. > >> #defining OVS_FRAG_TYPE_MASK as INET_ECN_MASK makes a lot less sense >> now, anyway. > > I had meant to update that, but missed it. > >> Dropping parse_tos_frag() dropped validation of the ipv4_tos and >> ipv4_frag members from flow_from_nlattrs(). Probably it's good to >> still validate them. > > Okay, I've put in new validation checks. > >> user >> ---- >> >> The tos field isn't bitwise maskable so we could use a FWW_* bit for >> it. (It might not be worth the churn though.) > > I agree. I've got some cleanups of other things that I'd like address after > this series, so I'll do that separately. > >> Like the kernel, the frag field uses all the bits so it's probably >> worthwhile to drop most of the bitwise operations there too. > > Yep. Updated. > >> In ofputil_normalize_rule(), I think I'd just rename MAY_TOS_FRAG to >> MAY_IPVx (or similar) instead of breaking it apart, since they always >> go together. > > Yeah, I was thinking along those lines. I've gone ahead and done that. > > --Justin > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
