Thanks for the review Ethan, one question on this below.
On Feb 26, 2013, at 1:10 PM, Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com>
wrote:
> Looks good to me with the following incremental which I've applied. I'll
> merge
> shortly. Thanks for doing this work Kyle.
>
> Ethan
>
> ---
> ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> index 8009c1c..9f7a49e 100644
> --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> @@ -847,7 +847,6 @@ type_run(const char *type)
> || !tag_set_is_empty(&backer->revalidate_set)) {
> struct tag_set revalidate_set = backer->revalidate_set;
> bool need_revalidate = backer->need_revalidate;
> - const struct simap_node **nodes;
> struct ofproto_dpif *ofproto;
> struct simap_node *node;
> struct simap tmp_backers;
> @@ -879,7 +878,7 @@ type_run(const char *type)
> } else {
> node = simap_find(&backer->tnl_backers, dp_port);
> if (!node) {
> - uint32_t odp_port = UINT32_MAX;
> + uint32_t odp_port;
>
> if (!dpif_port_add(backer->dpif, iter->up.netdev,
> &odp_port)) {
I looked at dpif_port_add(), and if you don't set odp_port to UINT32_MAX here,
the dpif_class->port_add() function will use some undefined value here to
assign the port number. This is the reason I made this change. Did I
misunderstand
this?
> @@ -934,7 +933,6 @@ type_run(const char *type)
> }
> }
> }
> -
> }
>
> if (timer_expired(&backer->next_expiration)) {
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev@openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
