jhsmt

We don't want to define a new architecture, rather the goal for P4TC is to have "functionally equivalence" to the hw datapath architecture - in this case PNA. I am...

Should PNA and PSA should call out the behavior in this regard or is it the spec that needs to be more specific? From the spec: "The exit statement immediately...

> This is what happens in P4 too. When `exit` is invoked, all processing in the current P4 block is halted and control passes back to the architecture. So the...

> If you think of a top level control as a process in software, then P4's `exit` seems pretty equivalent to me to `exit()` in Unix/Linux. > > If you...

> I believe PNA today does say that if you call `drop_packet()`, the packet should be dropped, and if you do not call `drop_packet()`, it should not be dropped. >...

@jafingerhut, you make good points; there is potential that someone would want to say "change the headers but if you see foo then yeah, skip those extra things and jump...

> To be clear, no one decided that "exit means go to deparse". > > It means "immediately exit the current top level control that is being executed". > >...

Ok, let me make my last comment and hopefully we can close this. In my view, the bottom line is whether exit() should imply a) stop processing the control block...

After some more internal discussions - I would like to take back everything i said. Lets stick to what the spec says. We need to do more testing of both...