On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Pravin Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Neil McKee <neil.mc...@inmon.com> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/net/openvswitch/actions.c b/net/openvswitch/actions.c
>>> index b491c1c..ee5760d 100644
>>> --- a/net/openvswitch/actions.c
>>> +++ b/net/openvswitch/actions.c
>>> @@ -608,7 +608,8 @@ static void do_output(struct datapath *dp, struct
>>> sk_buff *skb, int out_port)
>>> }
>>>
>>> static int output_userspace(struct datapath *dp, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>> - struct sw_flow_key *key, const struct nlattr
>>> *attr)
>>> + struct sw_flow_key *key, const struct nlattr
>>> *attr,
>>> + const struct nlattr *actions, int actions_len)
>>> {
>>> struct ovs_tunnel_info info;
>>> struct dp_upcall_info upcall;
>>> @@ -619,6 +620,8 @@ static int output_userspace(struct datapath *dp, struct
>>> sk_buff *skb,
>>> upcall.userdata = NULL;
>>> upcall.portid = 0;
>>> upcall.egress_tun_info = NULL;
>>> + upcall.actions = actions;
>>> + upcall.actions_len = actions_len;
>>>
>> Rather than unconditionally passing actions to the upcall, there
>> should be attribute in ovs_userspace_attr to request the actions list.
>
> Why? It seems simpler to just always pass the actions and I'm not sure
> that this is really performance critical (which is the only reason
> that comes to mind to not always pass this).
This is only required for sFlow sampling so I do not think we should
send it on every upcall.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
