I forgot to mention that this is the first post based against net-next. On 2 December 2014 at 18:56, Joe Stringer <[email protected]> wrote: > <....snip...> > diff --git a/net/openvswitch/flow.h b/net/openvswitch/flow.h > index a8b30f3..7f31dbf 100644 > --- a/net/openvswitch/flow.h > +++ b/net/openvswitch/flow.h > @@ -197,6 +197,13 @@ struct sw_flow_match { > struct sw_flow_mask *mask; > }; > > +#define MAX_UFID_LENGTH 256 > + > +struct sw_flow_id { > + u32 ufid_len; > + u32 ufid[MAX_UFID_LENGTH / 4]; > +}; > + > struct sw_flow_actions { > struct rcu_head rcu; > u32 actions_len;
Pravin, I changed the 'struct sw_flow_id' to the above after feedback from the previous round, but it doesn't seem quite right. Is this what you meant? Given that current ovs-vswitchd userspace only generates 128bit UFIDs, it seems wasteful to be allocating so much for this. Did you have in mind for this to be united with the unmasked_key? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
