On Wednesday 27 July 2016 06:43 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 6:46 AM, <bscha...@redhat.com
<mailto:bscha...@redhat.com>> wrote:
From: Babu Shanmugam <bscha...@redhat.com
<mailto:bscha...@redhat.com>>
Commit 263064a (Convert binding_run to incremental processing.)
removed the usage
of all_lports from binding_run, but it is infact used in the
context of the caller,
especially by update_ct_zones().
Without this change, update_ct_zones operates on an empty set always.
Signed-off-by: Babu Shanmugam <bscha...@redhat.com
<mailto:bscha...@redhat.com>>
Ouch. This is a really bad regression. If I understand correctly,
we're not setting a ct zone ID for any logical ports. All are just
using the default zone of 0.
Yes Russell, your understanding is correct.
We should think about a good way to test OVN's use of conntrack zones
to ensure that entries end up in separate zones for separate ports. A
good test for that may require userspace conntrack support, though.
Another test we could do now would be looking at the flows in table 0
and ensuring that the input flow for each port has a different
conntrack zone ID assigned. That feels like kind of a hack, though.
I agree that we need more test cases. I could not spend much time to
figure out a proper approach for a test case. I will have a look at it.
Thank you,
Babu
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
