[ovs-dev] [PATCH] meta-flow: Fix the NXM_NX_* names of xxreg2 and xxreg3.

Justin Pettit jpettit at ovn.org
Sat Oct 8 00:54:51 UTC 2016


That seems like a reasonable idea to me.  It's obviously not strictly necessary, but it's nice to be able to deal with contiguous ranges.

--Justin


> On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:44 PM, Jarno Rajahalme <jarno at ovn.org> wrote:
> 
> Should we also reserve some range of NXM_NX numbers after 114 for potential future registers, say 115-118 at least? Other register types do not have this problem as they have their own classes of numbers.
> 
>  Jarno
> 
>> On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Jarno Rajahalme <jarno at ovn.org> wrote:
>> 
>> xxreg2 and xxreg3 had the same NXM_NX_* names as xxreg0 and xxreg1,
>> correspondingly.
>> 
>> Found by inspection.
>> 
>> CC: Justin Pettit <jpettit at ovn.org>
>> Fixes: b23ada8eecfd ("Introduce 128-bit xxregs.")
>> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <jarno at ovn.org>
>> ---
>> include/openvswitch/meta-flow.h | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/include/openvswitch/meta-flow.h b/include/openvswitch/meta-flow.h
>> index 966ff7f..ef07561 100644
>> --- a/include/openvswitch/meta-flow.h
>> +++ b/include/openvswitch/meta-flow.h
>> @@ -940,8 +940,8 @@ enum OVS_PACKED_ENUM mf_field_id {
>>     * Access: read/write.
>>     * NXM: NXM_NX_XXREG0(111) since v2.6.              <0>
>>     * NXM: NXM_NX_XXREG1(112) since v2.6.              <1>
>> -     * NXM: NXM_NX_XXREG0(113) since v2.6.              <2>
>> -     * NXM: NXM_NX_XXREG1(114) since v2.6.              <3>
>> +     * NXM: NXM_NX_XXREG2(113) since v2.6.              <2>
>> +     * NXM: NXM_NX_XXREG3(114) since v2.6.              <3>
>>     * OXM: none.
>>     */
>>    MFF_XXREG0,
>> -- 
>> 2.1.4
>> 
> 




More information about the dev mailing list