Ignore below comment as I slightly overlooked it. invalid port is right drop reason.
Thanks, Gowrishankar On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 6:12 PM Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Anju, > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 3:30 PM Anju Thomas <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> switch ((enum ovs_action_attr)type) { >> case OVS_ACTION_ATTR_OUTPUT: >> @@ -6548,6 +6625,8 @@ dp_execute_cb(void *aux_, struct dp_packet_batch >> *packets_, >> dp_packet_batch_add(&p->output_pkts, packet); >> } >> return; >> > if() in DP_PACKET_BATCH_FOR_EACH always returns true, so below will never > get called. > > + } else { >> + COVERAGE_ADD(dp_invalid_port_drop, packets_->count); >> > > Instead, how about comparing p->output_packets->count before and > after DP_PACKET_BATCH_FOR_EACH. > Also, drop here is not because invalid port (or drop reason misleading > slightly), but due to "port_tx_flush".. right ?. > > Thanks, > Gowrishankar > > } >> break; >> >> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
