On Jun 20, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 03:16:43PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: >> If a flow cannot be installed in the datapath, we should notice >> this and not treat it as installed. This becomes an issue with >> megaflows, since a batch of unique flows may come in that generate >> a single new datapath megaflow that covers them. Since userspace >> doesn't know whether the datapath supports megaflows, each unique >> flow will get a separate flow entry (which overlap when masks are >> applied) and all except the first will get rejected by a megaflow- >> supporting datapath as duplicates. >> >> Signed-off-by: Justin Pettit <jpet...@nicira.com> > > The following is a little worrisome because EINVAL is very generic and > can indicate many kinds of errors. If we always suppress logging > EINVAL, then we could miss important problems. I am surprised that we > do not use EEXIST or another error that is less overloaded:
Agreed. Andy's going to change the kernel to return EEXIST instead. Are you okay with the patch with EINVAL references replaced with EEXIST? --Justin _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
