On Fri, 2015-09-18 at 10:26 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 01:49:49PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 15:27 -0400, John W. Linville wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linvi...@tuxdriver.com> > > > --- > > > > > } > > > > > > @@ -150,6 +159,10 @@ static void geneve_print_opt(struct link_util *lu, > > > FILE *f, struct rtattr *tb[]) > > > else > > > fprintf(f, "tos %#x ", tos); > > > } > > > + > > > + if (tb[IFLA_GENEVE_PORT]) > > > + fprintf(f, "dstport %u ", > > > + ntohs(rta_getattr_u16(tb[IFLA_GENEVE_PORT]))); > > > > This looks strange. > > > > Kernel does : > > > > if (nla_put_u16(skb, IFLA_GENEVE_PORT, ntohs(geneve->dst_port))) > > goto nla_put_failure; > > Indeed, you are right. I had essentially copied some vxlan code when > I did my version of adding the port attribute, and didn't take much > care when adapting that code for the version that actually got merged. > > The current geneve code is using host byte-order for the UDP port in > the netlink messages. But, I see that vxlan, gre, iptnl, etc are using > network byte order for specifying UDP ports in their netlink stuff. > Should geneve follow that practice as well? Or does it matter?
It might be too late to change the ABI, as geneve is in linux-4.2 Keep current host order in netlink messages and respin your iproute2 patch, and maybe add a comment to explain difference for a casual reader ? Thanks ! -- 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
