On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:29 PM Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 7 Sep 2022, at 8:54, Ales Musil wrote: > > > Through out the code there is the same pattern that occurs > > in regards to to finish_freezing when ctx->freezing=true or > > xlate_action_set when ctx->freezing=false. Extract it to common > > function that is called from those places instead. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ales Musil <[email protected]> > > Thanks for this change, it looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> > > Thank you for the review. Actually I think I have made a mistake. I did not realize that the xlate_action_set() can actually start freezing again. So the following diff should be applied to this patch set. If there will be another version I'll will apply the diff below: diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c index e181e3089..c84d6c9d0 100644 --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c @@ -3884,10 +3884,11 @@ xlate_flow_is_protected(const struct xlate_ctx *ctx, const struct flow *flow, co static void xlate_ctx_process_freezing(struct xlate_ctx *ctx) { + if (!ctx->freezing) { + xlate_action_set(ctx); + } if (ctx->freezing) { finish_freezing(ctx); - } else { - xlate_action_set(ctx); } } Thanks, Ales -- Ales Musil Senior Software Engineer - OVN Core Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com> [email protected] IM: amusil <https://red.ht/sig> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
