Vipul Ashri via dev <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Adrián, > > Thanks for reviewing and reaching the depth of this issue. > > Right now addressing your first two comments with [PATCH v2], > > but as per third comment I agree we should have right reimplementation > of flush API which need some aggressive changes but I find > reimplementation is optional for current stability and can be deferred > as we already calling right APIs to smartly cleaning right dp flows > before dustruct() Apis e.g. close_dpif_backer() etc. > > We have also tested this patch with our inhouse deployments, and we > currently started using it as downstream patch with our latest > releases. We find no issue with the patch so far.
I don't think this is a very helpful response. Except in the most extreme cases, we should be able to add tests for specific scenarios. "Worked on my system when I tested it," doesn't apply to everyone's systems. Also, the CC list in my client showed: CC: <[email protected]> Adrian's email should be [email protected] So I fixed it in this reply. > BR > Vipul > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
