[ovs-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] Add address set support.

[Ben Pfaff]

On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 10:51:39PM -0500, Ryan Moats wrote:
> 
> 
> "dev" <dev-bounces at openvswitch.org> wrote on 07/02/2016 10:41:18 PM:
> 
> > From: Ryan Moats/Omaha/IBM at IBMUS
> > To: Ben Pfaff <blp at ovn.org>
> > Cc: dev at openvswitch.org
> > Date: 07/02/2016 10:41 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] Add address set support.
> > Sent by: "dev" <dev-bounces at openvswitch.org>
> >
> > Ryan Moats/Omaha/IBM wrote on 07/02/2016 10:37:24 PM:
> >
> > > From: Ryan Moats/Omaha/IBM
> > > To: Ben Pfaff <blp at ovn.org>
> > > Cc: bschanmu at redhat.com, dev at openvswitch.org
> > > Date: 07/02/2016 10:37 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] Add address set support.
> > >
> > > "dev" <dev-bounces at openvswitch.org> wrote on 07/02/2016 10:30:29 PM:
> > >
> > > > From: Ben Pfaff <blp at ovn.org>
> > > > To: bschanmu at redhat.com
> > > > Cc: dev at openvswitch.org
> > > > Date: 07/02/2016 10:30 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] Add address set support.
> > > > Sent by: "dev" <dev-bounces at openvswitch.org>
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 02:20:40PM +0530, bschanmu at redhat.com wrote:
> > > > > From: Russel Bryant <russell at ovn.org>
> > > >
> > > > This misspells Russell's name (I fixed it).
> > > >
> > > > > Update the OVN expression parser to support address sets.
> > Previously,
> > > > > you could have a set of IP or MAC addresses in this form:
> > > > >
> > > > >     {addr1, addr2, ..., addrN}
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch adds support for a bit of indirection where we can
> define
> > a
> > > > > set of addresses and refer to them by name.
> > > > >
> > > > >     $name
> > > > >
> > > > > This '$name' can be used in the expresssions like
> > > > >
> > > > >     {addr1, addr2, $name, ... }
> > > > >     {$name}
> > > > >     $name
> > > > >
> > > > > A future patch will expose the ability to define address sets for
> > use.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Russell Bryant <russell at ovn.org>
> > > > > Co-authored-by: Babu Shanmugam <bschanmu at redhat.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Babu Shanmugam <bschanmu at redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > > Thanks a lot!
> > > >
> > > > The results that Kyle reported are really impressive, so I want to
> > start
> > > > getting this in.  Unfortunately I think that patch 2 probably
> conflicts
> > > > with Ryan's incremental series, which I'm trying to prioritize
> because
> > > > it's been in progress so long.  So I'm just looking at patch 1 in
> this
> > > > review round.
> > >
> > > Because of our interest in this set, I've already taken a pass
> > > at merging part 2 with the incremental patch series and can
> > > share the needed delta (if it would be of interested here...)
> >
> > Oh well, I conveniently forgot to mention in the above that you've
> already
> > nailed part 3 of my latest series, so I'll be spinning a v21...
> >
> > Ryan
> 
> Ben, the rebase delta for part 3 is a single line (L338 getting NULL added
> as the third arguement) - I can spin you another patch series for a single
> line change, but it likely won't land until tomorrow morning...

Trivial rebases are a waste of time.  Given that it's so simple, I'll
work from v20.