On 12/11/2017 10:55 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:25:54AM -0800, Gregory Rose wrote:
On 12/10/2017 4:39 PM, Yang, Yi wrote:
On Sat, Dec 09, 2017 at 12:42:32AM +0800, Gregory Rose wrote:
On 12/8/2017 6:04 AM, Yi Yang wrote:
v5->v6
- Rebase v5 to master
- Refactor netlink message format to align to NSH kernel
implementation
- Add dec_nsh_ttl unit test into tests/nsh.at
- Fix unit test unstable issue
I don't see any backport of the upstream kernel datapath changes? I'm
working on catching our out of tree datapath code with the upstream
Linux kernel datapath and your patch (commit
b2d0f5d5dc53532e6f07bc546a476a55ebdfe0f3 " openvswitch: enable NSH
support") needs the backport as well as compat layer changes.
Do you plan on doing that work?
Thanks,
- Greg
Greg, yes, I'll backport kernel datapath patches once this patch series
is merged. BTW this doesn't depend on the kernel datapath patches.
Understood that this series of patches you sent does not require the kernel
datapath backport
but I found that the kernel datapath patches do modify the openvswitch uapi
header and adds
new switch cases. These need to be handled eventually which can be done
when you do the
backport.
Greg and Yi, can you help me understand the compatibility and patch
workflow implications of accepting this series now instead of after the
kernel datapath backport? In your opinions, is it important to apply
them in a particular order?
Ben,
I started backporting the upstream NSH patch from Yi and found that I
had to make some
related user space changes to make it compile correctly. So it would
appear that the upstream
kernel patch would require this set of patches first.
That said, let's get Yi's response since he is far more familiar with
the NSH work than I am.
Thanks,
- Greg
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
