On 3/26/25 13:58, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> 
> 
> On 26 Mar 2025, at 13:20, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> 
>> On 3/25/25 16:39, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 25 Mar 2025, at 16:29, Aaron Conole wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eelco Chaudron via dev <ovs-dev@openvswitch.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> LGTM.
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Aaron Conole <acon...@redhat.com>
>>>>
>>>> BTW, do you think we should turn on the spell checker in the robot?
>>>> Currently it is off because there are some false positives that still
>>>> get flagged.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the review!  It might be a good trigger to update our word list,
>>> and if we do get too many reports, we can always turn it off.
>>
>> I'm not sure about this.  We hit unknown to the word list terms
>> regularly still.  There are lots of them.  We need some better
>> heuristics for detecting words that should not be checked, like
>> function and variable names and module names in patch subjects.
>>
>> For the patch itself, could you, please, come up with a little
>> more descriptive subject for it?  It's not good to have commits
>> named the same way in the history and there is a high chance
>> will may have another one like this in the future.  Maybe something
>> like:
>>
>>   ofproto-dpif: Fix spelling in comments and the support field macro.
>>
>> WDYT?
> 
> Sounds good, I’ll send a v3.
> 
>>>>>  ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>>>>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
>>>>> index 25b1d9322..06f6d7be3 100644
>>>>> --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
>>>>> +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
>>>>> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ struct ofbundle {
>>>>>                                   * NULL if all VLANs are trunked. */
>>>>>      unsigned long *cvlans;
>>>>>      struct lacp *lacp;          /* LACP if LACP is enabled, otherwise 
>>>>> NULL. */
>>>>> -    struct bond *bond;          /* Nonnull iff more than one port. */
>>>>> +    struct bond *bond;          /* Nonnull if more than one port. */
>>>>>      enum port_priority_tags_mode use_priority_tags;
>>>>>                                  /* Use 802.1p tag for frames in VLAN 0? 
>>>>> */
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -1508,7 +1508,7 @@ check_max_dp_hash_alg(struct dpif_backer *backer)
>>>>>      ofpbuf_use_stack(&key, &keybuf, sizeof keybuf);
>>>>>      odp_flow_key_from_flow(&odp_parms, &key);
>>>>>
>>>>> -    /* All datapaths support algortithm 0 (OVS_HASH_ALG_L4). */
>>>>> +    /* All datapaths support algorithm 0 (OVS_HASH_ALG_L4). */
>>>>>      for (int alg = 1; alg < __OVS_HASH_MAX; alg++) {
>>>>>          struct ofpbuf actions;
>>>>>          bool ok;
>>>>> @@ -3642,7 +3642,7 @@ bundle_set(struct ofproto *ofproto_, void *aux,
>>>>>          bundle->bond = NULL;
>>>>>      }
>>>>>
>>>>> -    /* Set proteced port mode */
>>>>> +    /* Set protected port mode */
>>
>> While we're here, may as well add a period to the end.
> 
> +1
> 
>>
>>>>>      if (s->protected != bundle->protected) {
>>>>>          bundle->protected = s->protected;
>>>>>          need_flush = true;
>>>>> @@ -4609,7 +4609,7 @@ ofproto_dpif_credit_table_stats(struct ofproto_dpif 
>>>>> *ofproto, uint8_t table_id,
>>>>>
>>>>>  /* Look up 'flow' in 'ofproto''s classifier version 'version', starting 
>>>>> from
>>>>>   * table '*table_id'.  Returns the rule that was found, which may be one 
>>>>> of the
>>>>> - * special rules according to packet miss hadling.  If 'may_packet_in' is
>>>>> + * special rules according to packet miss handling.  If 'may_packet_in' 
>>>>> is
>>>>>   * false, returning of the miss_rule (which issues packet ins for the
>>>>>   * controller) is avoided.  Updates 'wc', if nonnull, to reflect the 
>>>>> fields
>>>>>   * that were used during the lookup.
>>>>> @@ -6535,7 +6535,7 @@ struct dpif_support_field {
>>>>>      enum dpif_support_field_type type;
>>>>>  };
>>>>>
>>>>> -#define DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_INTIALIZER(RT_PTR, BT_PTR, TITLE, TYPE) \
>>>>> +#define DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_INITIALIZER(RT_PTR, BT_PTR, TITLE, TYPE) \
>>>>>      (struct dpif_support_field) {RT_PTR, BT_PTR, TITLE, TYPE}
>>>>>
>>>>>  static void
>>>>> @@ -6601,26 +6601,26 @@ dpif_set_support(struct dpif_backer_support 
>>>>> *rt_support,
>>>>>      struct shash_node *node;
>>>>>      bool changed = false;
>>>>>
>>>>> -#define DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD(TYPE, NAME, TITLE) \
>>>>> -    {\
>>>>> -      struct dpif_support_field *f = xmalloc(sizeof *f);            \
>>>>> -      *f = DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_INTIALIZER(&rt_support->NAME,         \
>>>>> -                                         &bt_support->NAME,         \
>>>>> -                                         TITLE,                     \
>>>>> -                                         DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_##TYPE);\
>>>>> -      shash_add_once(&all_fields, #NAME, f);                        \
>>>>> +#define DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD(TYPE, NAME, TITLE)                           \
>>>>> +    {                                                                   \
>>>>> +        struct dpif_support_field *f = xmalloc(sizeof *f);              \
>>>>> +        *f = DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_INITIALIZER(&rt_support->NAME,          \
>>>>> +                                            &bt_support->NAME,          \
>>>>> +                                            TITLE,                      \
>>>>> +                                            DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_##TYPE); \
>>>>> +        shash_add_once(&all_fields, #NAME, f);                          \
>>>>>      }
>>>>>      DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELDS;
>>>>>  #undef DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD
>>>>>
>>>>> -#define ODP_SUPPORT_FIELD(TYPE, NAME, TITLE) \
>>>>> -    {\
>>>>> -        struct dpif_support_field *f = xmalloc(sizeof *f);            \
>>>>> -        *f = DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_INTIALIZER(&rt_support->odp.NAME,     \
>>>>> -                                           &bt_support->odp.NAME,     \
>>>>> -                                           TITLE,                     \
>>>>> -                                           DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_##TYPE);\
>>>>> -      shash_add_once(&all_fields, #NAME, f);                          \
>>>>> +#define ODP_SUPPORT_FIELD(TYPE, NAME, TITLE)                            \
>>>>> +    {                                                                   \
>>>>> +        struct dpif_support_field *f = xmalloc(sizeof *f);              \
>>>>> +        *f = DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_INITIALIZER(&rt_support->odp.NAME,      \
>>>>> +                                            &bt_support->odp.NAME,      \
>>>>> +                                            TITLE,                      \
>>>>> +                                            DPIF_SUPPORT_FIELD_##TYPE); \
>>>>> +        shash_add_once(&all_fields, #NAME, f);                          \
>>>>>      }
>>>>>      ODP_SUPPORT_FIELDS;
>>>>>  #undef ODP_SUPPORT_FIELD
>>>>> @@ -6655,7 +6655,8 @@ dpif_set_support(struct dpif_backer_support 
>>>>> *rt_support,
>>>>>                  *(bool *) field->rt_ptr = true;
>>>>>                  changed = true;
>>>>>              } else {
>>>>> -                ds_put_cstr(ds, "Can not enable features not supported 
>>>>> by the datapth");
>>>>> +                ds_put_cstr(ds, "Can not enable features not supported 
>>>>> by "
>>>>> +                                "the datapath");
>>
>> I'd suggest to move the whole thing to the new line instead of breaking it.
>> Seems inconsistent with the rest of the function.
> 
> But that it would become (to still meet the line lenght):
> 
>                 ds_put_cstr(ds,
>                             "Can not enable features not supported by the "
>                             "datapath");
> 

Maybe something like this:

                ds_put_cstr(ds,
                    "Can not enable features not supported by the datapth");
?

Not ideal, but seems better than other options.


>>>>>              }
>>>>>          } else if (!strcasecmp(value, "false")) {
>>>>>              *(bool *)field->rt_ptr = false;
>>>
> 

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to