On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:13:25PM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote: > I'm not so happy about reverting without having the followup ready. How > close are we to having the followup? Basically we've got two problems > here. Without the revert, we have one of them; with the revert, we have > the other one. I'd rather not trade one for the other, that's not > ideal. It would be much better to fix both in one shot.
Hi Ben, I guess one is a performance problem and the other is a broken environment that has no workaround (to my knowledge). The kernel fix and possibly a follow up in userspace is on my ToDo list, but I haven't had a chance to get to it yet. Thanks, fbl > > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 07:55:36AM -0200, Flavio Leitner wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Just a reminder about this revert. > > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 12:30:47PM -0200, Flavio Leitner wrote: > > > > > > This should be applied to branch-2.10 as well. > > > > And now branch-2.11 > > > > Thanks, > > fbl > > > > > > > > (BTW, I had CC few folks in the patchset, but I am only seeing Guru, so > > > I am adding them to this email just in case) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > fbl > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 12:24:45PM -0200, Flavio Leitner wrote: > > > > The optimization introduced a regression in OSP environments using > > > > internal ports in other netns. Their networking configuration is lost > > > > when the service is restarted because the ports are recreated now. > > > > > > > > Before the patch it checked using netlink if the port with a specific > > > > "name" was already there. The check is a lookup in all ports attached > > > > to the DP regardless of the port's netns. > > > > > > > > After the patch it relies on the kernel to identify that situation. > > > > Unfortunately the only protection there is register_netdevice() which > > > > fails only if the port with that name exists in the current netns. > > > > > > > > If the port is in another netns, it will get a new dp_port and because > > > > of that userspace will delete the old port. At this point the original > > > > port is gone from the other netns and there a fresh port in the current > > > > netns. > > > > > > > > This patchset reverts the original commit and the two other follow ups. > > > > > > > > Flavio Leitner (3): > > > > Revert "dpif-netlink: Don't destroy and recreate port if it exists" > > > > Revert "ofproto-dpif: Check for EBUSY as well" > > > > Revert "ofproto-dpif: Let the dpif report when a port is a duplicate." > > > > > > > > lib/dpif-netlink.c | 4 ++-- > > > > lib/dpif.c | 9 ++------- > > > > ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c | 7 ++++--- > > > > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.17.2 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > dev mailing list > > > d...@openvswitch.org > > > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
