On 1 February 2017 at 11:06, Joe Stringer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 31 January 2017 at 16:57, Joe Stringer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>  /* Returns true if a variable length meta-flow field 'mff' is not mapped in
>>   * the 'vl_mff_map'. */
>>  bool
>> -mf_vl_mff_not_mapped(const struct mf_field *mff,
>> -                     const struct vl_mff_map *vl_mff_map)
>> +mf_vl_mff_mapped(const struct mf_field *mff, const struct vl_mff_map *map)
>>  {
>> -    if (mff && vl_mff_map) {
>> -        if (mff->variable_len && !mff->mapped) {
>> -            return true;
>> -        }
>> -    }
>> -
>> -    return false;
>> +    return !(map && mff && mff->variable_len && !mff->mapped);
>>  }
>
> Yi-Hung pointed out offline that this reversal doesn't quite sit right
> logically; this function is searching for a specific set of invalid
> conditions, where there is a vl_mff_map, and the field is
> variable-length, and it's not mapped. It's misleading to have all of
> this covered by a function named "...mapped()".
>
> I suggest we retain the original logic but rename the function to
> something like mf_vl_mff_invalid().

I applied this to master.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to