On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 01:35:41PM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote: > > > On 08/08/2017 11:04, Simon Horman wrote: > >On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 07:36:25AM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote: > >> > >> > >>On 07/08/2017 20:05, Ben Pfaff wrote: > >>>On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:00:31AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > >>>>On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:32:02AM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote: > >>>>>From: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com> > >>>>> > >>>>>Always implement get_ifindex without checking if offload is > >>>>>enabled or not as this should not be related. From ovs-dpctl > >>>>>we cannot tell if offload is enabled or not as other_config is > >>>>>not being read. > >>>>> > >>>>>Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com> > >>>>>Reviewed-by: Roi Dayan <r...@mellanox.com> > >>>> > >>>>Applied to master and branch-2.8, thanks! > >>> > >>>Sorry, I had to revert this because it caused several unit test > >>>failures: 770 781 783 787 788 791 2189 2378. > >>> > >> > >>This is because of the warnings from get_ifindex which resolved in > >>the second patch but was missing the ratelimiting you mentioned. > >>I submitted V2 of it to add back the ratelimiting > >>"netdev-linux: Reduce log level for ENODEV errors getting ifindex" > > > >In that case shouldn't the patch order be reversed to avoid > >the (temporary) regression Ben pointed out? > > > > right. > should i post V3 for changing the order or is it something that > can be done when merged?
I guess its up to Ben, but surely posting v3 would not hurt. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev