On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 08:56:27AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 09:40:55AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > - if (code == OFPUTIL_OFPT_PACKET_IN) {
> > > + if (code == OFPUTIL_OFPT_PACKET_IN && oh->version == OFP10_VERSION) {
> >
> > I am wondering if it would be better to rename OFPUTIL_OFPT_PACKET_IN as
> > OFPUTIL_OFPT10_PACKET_IN and add OFPUTIL_OFPT12_PACKET_IN and avoid
> > checking oh->version directly here. The same probably applies to other
> > the decoders for other messages that differ between Open Flow 1.0 and 1.2.
>
> I'm not sure; I'm split on a similar issue for the flow_mod message.
>
> A single code has the advantage that client code doesn't have to
> unnecessarily distinguish messages that are, from its perspective,
> equivalent. Separate codes have the advantage that the decode function
> doesn't have to distinguish the different versions of a message.
>
> On the whole, I'm leaning toward using a single code, on the principle
> that one should isolate complexity in libraries, not in their clients.
Thanks, I have mostly used a single code and I think that ends up being
simpler overall. I'll move all of my code in that direction and see what
happens.
> (This also argues for, e.g., merging OFPUTIL_NXT_FLOW_MOD into
> OFPUTIL_OFPT_FLOW_MOD.)
Yes, that would make the treatment of different versions of
Flow Mod a bit more consistent.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
