On 9 Jan 2022, at 14:44, lic121 wrote:
> Currently, ipfix creation/delection don't trigger dpif backer > revalidation. This is not expected, as we need the revalidation > to commit ipfix into xlate. So that xlate can generate ipfix > actions. > > Signed-off-by: lic121 <[email protected]> > --- > ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c > index bc3df8e..1cdef18 100644 > --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c > +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c > @@ -2306,6 +2306,7 @@ set_ipfix( > { > struct ofproto_dpif *ofproto = ofproto_dpif_cast(ofproto_); > struct dpif_ipfix *di = ofproto->ipfix; > + struct dpif_ipfix *old_ipfix = ofproto->ipfix; > bool has_options = bridge_exporter_options || flow_exporters_options; > bool new_di = false; > > @@ -2335,6 +2336,10 @@ set_ipfix( > } > } > > + if (old_ipfix != ofproto->ipfix) { This only works if ipfix was not configured earlier or disabled, i.e., ofproto->ipfix was/is NULL. If this was your intention, you could just have done “if (new_di || !ofproto->ipfix)”. However, I think there can also be changed in the configuration that requires a revalidate, what do you think? For example, enabling/disabling ingress/egress sampling. In this case dpif_ipfix_set_options() can be changed so it will return true if any configuration changes. > + ofproto->backer->need_revalidate = REV_RECONFIGURE; > + } > + > return 0; > } > > -- > 1.8.3.1 > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
