On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 07:54:51AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> writes: > > > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 11:47:46AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > >> Hi Ben, > >> > >> Thanks for the look! > >> > >> Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> writes: > >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 04:44:32PM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > >> >> Greetings dev, > >> >> > >> >> I have whipped up a quick little utility (find below), that I've done a > >> >> bit of debugging with and it seems to have made working with dump-flows > >> >> from ovs-ofctl a little easier to use. > >> >> > >> >> If you think it's worthwhile to add to the repository, I'll submit it > >> >> formally. We were using it while debugging some strange packet > >> >> forwarding in openshift. > >> >> > >> >> -Aaron > >> > > >> > Thanks for working to make the ovs-ofctl formatting better! > >> > > >> > I prefer to interpret this script as a kind of "feature request" for > >> > "ovs-ofctl dump-flows". This command already has some special support, > >> > compared to other ovs-ofctl commands, and it might make sense to > >> > continue adding to it. > >> > >> In which way? It calls the same ofp-print code, iirc. > >> > >> > ovs-ofctl dump-flows already has one of the features that this script > >> > adds, that is, sorting the flows and removing "OFPST_FLOW" lines. You > >> > turn this on by using the "--sort" (or "--rsort") option. > >> > >> Ahh, cool - I missed that. > >> > >> > The other features that this script provides all seem like ones that > >> > would be useful to add to ovs-ofctl itself. I'd tend to prefer to > >> > continue enhancing it rather than adding wrapper scripts; I think that > >> > this is likely to yield a more coherent design in the end, and possibly > >> > higher quality. Is that something you're willing to consider? > >> > >> I had started to work on this, back in December, but there were hundreds > >> of lines of existing formatting code that would have to change (this is > >> related to the discussion here: > >> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2016-December/326560.html), > >> and I thought it might be a better use of time to simply wrap the output > >> - especially since I didn't know if any future changes in that area were > >> going to happen. The last thing I want to do is break the existing > >> output (which I do use quite a bit for debugging, so retraining myself > >> would be painful) if someone has scripts which rely on it. > >> Additionally, quite a few print commands would have changed to give the > >> data to the table structure, rather than a long string. It looked to be > >> a rather large change for something that could be resolved with a > >> wrapper. Maybe I misinterpreted your response (from here > >> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2016-December/326201.html). > >> > >> The other thing that adds complication is replacing the port numbers > >> with names from the database. That would require a second transaction > >> (unless there's a way to batch that during the initial dump-flows > >> request, but I couldn't see an obvious way), and I didn't know if it > >> would be okay to do (and how to treat failures... after all, it's > >> convenient, but it isn't requisite to have the numbers replaced with > >> names). There are a few minor changes I have to my copy of the script > >> (I've added back the packet counts, and I have the port output in a way > >> that we can not-quite paste the flow back in to an add-flow), but I > >> ended up also using the direct output of dump-flows. > >> > >> As for how to implement it, I could have put some kind of post processor > >> that would split the strings up (the way I have done with the script), > >> but that felt rather hacky (since it's basically the formatting script, > >> but in c-code form). > >> > >> Anyway, I submitted this as a start. If you think it's better to do the > >> work in the ofp-print library then I can revisit it. Maybe the reduced > >> set of things that were really helpful, and the rest we can just say > >> "don't fear sed". > > > > Since this discussion, I've added what I think are the script's most > > important features directly to ovs-ofctl. Are the remaining features, > > not yet in ovs-ofctl, important you? Which ones? > > No, they aren't. We have resolved the related issue in our BZ. Thanks.
OK. Feel free to re-raise anything that comes up and I'll see what I can do to make ovs-ofctl friendlier. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
