[ovs-dev] [PATCH] datapath: Add basic MPLS support to kernel

[Simon Horman]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:00:56PM -0700, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:14:07PM -0700, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Jesse Gross <jesse at nicira.com> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> 
> >> >> @@ -341,10 +376,14 @@ static int netdev_send(struct vport *vport, struct sk_buff *skb)
> >> >>                                 nskb = skb->next;
> >> >>                                 skb->next = NULL;
> >> >>
> >> >> -                               skb = __vlan_put_tag(skb, vlan_tx_tag_get(skb));
> >> >> +                               if (vlan)
> >> >> +                                       skb = __vlan_put_tag(skb, vlan_tx_tag_get(skb));
> >> >>                                 if (likely(skb)) {
> >> >>                                         len += skb->len;
> >> >> -                                       vlan_set_tci(skb, 0);
> >> >> +                                       if (mpls)
> >> >> +                                               skb->protocol = mpls_protocol;
> >> >> +                                       if (vlan)
> >> >> +                                               vlan_set_tci(skb, 0);
> >> >>                                         dev_queue_xmit(skb);
> >> >>                                 }
> >> >
> >> > The order of setting the protocol field is different from the one
> >> > below and I think this one isn't right because it means that the MPLS
> >> > protocol can override the vlan.
> >> >
> >> > Pravin, can you take a look at this as well since you are working in
> >> > the same area?
> >>
> >> I think this compatibility code can be moved to new compat code posted
> >> on gre-restructuring code few changes.
> >
> > Sure that sounds reasonable but I am unsure of the status of those changes
> > and I would rather not rely on something that isn't ready to merge yet.
> 
> Right. sorry abt delay.
> But I think it is much closer now and it would be alot easy to handle
> compatibility, so it is worth waiting for.

Thanks. In that case we'll try to base the next version of this
patch on your patch.