From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] vxlan: Group Policy extension Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 02:55:39 +0000 Message-ID: <20150115025539.GA20315@casper.infradead.org> References: <20150115002323.GH2105@casper.infradead.org> <20150115012804.GI2105@casper.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , Jesse Gross , Stephen Hemminger , Pravin B Shelar , Alexei Starovoitov , Nicolas Dichtel , Linux Netdev List , "dev@openvswitch.org" To: Tom Herbert Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:35222 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751175AbbAOCzk (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2015 21:55:40 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150115012804.GI2105@casper.infradead.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 01/15/15 at 01:28am, Thomas Graf wrote: > What exactly is the problem of having a distinct bitmap used by > extensions? It is the least error prone method because it's clear that > all extensions must match and we don't have to maintain an additional > bitmask which can be forgotten to be updated. > > If you need to compare additional receive checksum settings for RCO > then that should be separate because as you say it's not an extension. Tom, OK. I have changed it to use flags instead of exts in v6. You should be able to add whatever RCO flags need to be matched in vxlan_find_sock() to the VXLAN_F_UNSHAREABLE bitmask. Hope this makes everybody happy ;-)