>On 14/12/2016 06:38, "Balazs Nemeth" wrote:
>
>>>On 12/12/2016 13:14, "Ben Pfaff" wrote:
>>>
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 06:50:32PM -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> The order of the options in the packet generated by ovs-controller
> depends on the hash function. I believe that murmu
On 14/12/2016 06:38, "Balazs Nemeth" wrote:
>>On 12/12/2016 13:14, "Ben Pfaff" wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 06:50:32PM -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
The order of the options in the packet generated by ovs-controller
depends on the hash function. I believe that murmur
>On 12/12/2016 13:14, "Ben Pfaff" mailto:b...@ovn.org>> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 06:50:32PM -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
>>> The order of the options in the packet generated by ovs-controller
>>> depends on the hash function. I believe that murmur hash (our default)
>>> produces dif
On 12/12/2016 13:14, "Ben Pfaff" wrote:
>On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 06:50:32PM -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
>> The order of the options in the packet generated by ovs-controller
>> depends on the hash function. I believe that murmur hash (our default)
>> produces different outputs dependi
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 06:50:32PM -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> The order of the options in the packet generated by ovs-controller
> depends on the hash function. I believe that murmur hash (our default)
> produces different outputs depending on the endianness of the system.
>
> This commi
The order of the options in the packet generated by ovs-controller
depends on the hash function. I believe that murmur hash (our default)
produces different outputs depending on the endianness of the system.
This commit fixes the test by reordering the options in the packet
before checking them.
