Hi Ben, I get a few questions when finalizing this patch series. It would be great if I can have some comments from you before I send the v2 out.
1) In order to support tun_metadata as the pipeline fields in the packet-out message, it seems like it makes more sense to use 'struct match' than 'struct flow' since 'struct match' includes 'struct tun_metadata_allocation'? 2) Should we include the connection tracking fields as the pipeline fileds in the packet out message? Thanks, -Yi-Hung On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:24:16AM -0700, Yi-Hung Wei wrote: >> Hi Ben, >> >> Thanks for your valuable review. Yes, it makes sense to use 'struct flow' >> instead of 'struct match' to represent metadata. >> >> As for the "pipeline fields", I briefly look at ovs-fields (7), and I think >> the >> patch series should be update to include at least the following fields. >> * Tunnel fields: (tun_src/dst, tun_ipv6_src/dst, tun_gbp_id, >> tun_gbp_flags, tun_flags, tun_metadata0 - tun_metadata63) >> * Register fields: (reg0 - reg15, xreg0 - xreg7, xxreg0 - xxreg3) >> >> I will address these issues and send out a v2 soon. > > OK, thank you! > > Maybe there should be an mf_*() function that identifies pipeline > fields. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
