On 07/08/2017 17:01, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:32:03AM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote:These are normal and unavoidable, because the vifs disappear from the kernel before they are removed them from the OVS database. Signed-off-by: Roi Dayan <r...@mellanox.com> Reviewed-by: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com> --- lib/netdev-linux.c | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/netdev-linux.c b/lib/netdev-linux.c index 98820ed..f5aa9c9 100644 --- a/lib/netdev-linux.c +++ b/lib/netdev-linux.c @@ -5438,8 +5438,12 @@ linux_get_ifindex(const char *netdev_name) error = af_inet_ioctl(SIOCGIFINDEX, &ifr); if (error) { - VLOG_WARN_RL(&rl, "ioctl(SIOCGIFINDEX) on %s device failed: %s", - netdev_name, ovs_strerror(error)); + /* ENODEV probably means that a vif disappeared asynchronously and + * hasn't been removed from the database yet, so reduce the log level + * to INFO for that case. */ + VLOG(error == ENODEV ? VLL_INFO : VLL_ERR, + "ioctl(SIOCGIFINDEX) on %s device failed: %s", + netdev_name, ovs_strerror(error)); return -error; } return ifr.ifr_ifindex;This may be a reasonable change, but why remove the ratelimiting?
because I actually took the same call from get_etheraddr() which and doesn't use a ratelimit. I'll bring it back. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
