On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 10:16:22AM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > On May 7, 2012, at 5:08 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > > On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 11:56:52AM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > >> Not all ports may fit in a Features Reply, so use the new port > >> description stat message instead for looking up ports. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Justin Pettit <[email protected]> > > > > Unless I'm misreading this (which is possible) it only works with a > > switch that supports OFPST_PORT_DESC. I don't think we should rely on > > that, since no deployed OVS or other OpenFlow 1.[012] switch > > implements it. I think we should use OFPST_PORT_DESC as a fallback in > > the case where the switch returns the maximum number of ports. > > The thought occurred to me, too, but I didn't know how often people > are not pairing ovs-ofctl with the locally built ovs-vswitchd. But > you're correct, that it's better to handle that so I sent out a > revised version of the patch.
My own intention has always been that ovs-ofctl should work with any OpenFlow switch, not just with OVS, and that it should work with other versions of OVS too. I've made a note to document that. I agree that this is not the most common use. > > As long as I'm looking at it, though, you can drop the use of n_ports > > in fetch_ofputil_phy_port(). ofputil_pull_phy_port() will return EOF > > when it's run out of ports to iterate. > > Man, you just don't let me get away with any laziness. It's cleaned > up in the revised patch. Thanks. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
