On 7/1/26 4:46 PM, Takeru Hayasaka wrote:
> Hi Ilya, thanks a lot for the review!
>
>> I wonder if what you actually want is to show the fdb tables of
>> all the bridges? Or most of the bridges? We have many different
>> commands for which the standard behavior is to print information
>> for all bridges/datapaths/ports in case a specific target is not
>> specified, i.e. the call has no arguemnts. So, I wonder if it
>> would be better to instead of supporting multiple arguments with
>> support the case of no arguments and show information for all
>> bridges in this case, as that would be more in line with other
>> commands we have.
>
> On the argument handling, I'd like to support two cases
> 1. No args -> show all bridges. I agree this is the right default and
> matches our other commands.
> 2. One or more args -> show just those bridges.
>
> The reason for keeping case 2 is that agents often poll only a subset
> of bridges (e.g. an EVPN agent only cares about its own VNIs).
> Always dumping every bridge would walk FDB tables the client doesn't
> need. Does that sound reasonable?
OK. Sounds fine from the user interface perspective.
>
>> Some more comments below.
>
> I agreed with all the other comments:)
> 1. On the text args: I'll turn the bridge name into a column instead,
> with two variants of the table.
> 2. On the JSON output: "bridge"/"entries" isn't a great shape. I'll
> key the object by bridge name with the entries array as the value,
> i.e. {"br0": [...], "br1": [...]}. Entries stay an array since there's
> no unique key for them.
>
> I'll also trim the NEWS entry down to the first line and switch to two
> blank lines between sections for the major release.
Thanks!
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
