On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 11:50:42AM -0800, 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.
Sounds good, thank you. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
