On 2022-03-18 7:55 PM, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
On 17 Mar 2022, at 2:01, Chris Mi wrote:
On 2022-03-11 8:53 PM, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
<SNIP>
@@ -449,6 +462,7 @@ dpif_close(struct dpif *dpif)
if (dpif) {
struct registered_dpif_class *rc;
+ dpif_offload_close(dpif);
** Not sure I understand, but why are we destroying the offload dpif class
here, it can be used by another dpif type.
** I guess this is all because your design has a 1:1 mapping? Guess it should
be two dpif_types that could share the same offload class type.
Now it is moved to dpif_netlink_close().
Except the 1:1 mapping comment which I think need Ilya's feedback, I have
addressed your other comments.
Thanks for your comments. The dpif-offload for dummy is not needed and removed.
If needed, I can send v21.
Thanks for taking care of the questions and fixing them in your sandbox.
I would prefer for you to not send any more revisions until we have a clear
answer from Ilya.
Since Ilya didn't reply, I'll send a new version to reflect the latest change.
Well, my goal was to not do any more reviews until Ilya would reply, as every
review cycle takes up quite some time.
OK, hopefully Ilya could review it soon.
However I could not get v21 to apply cleanly, so I will hold off on any further
reviews of this series until we have a clear direction from Ilya.
The reason is because we thought patch "tc: Keep header rewrite actions
order" should be merged first.
So this series is rebased on that.
-Chris
//Eelco
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
