Looks good to me.
I also did some fast tests and the behaviour is now correct.
I saw that this has already been merged, but here's my ack
Acked-by: Daniele Venturino <daniele.ventur...@m3s.it>
> Il giorno 06/mar/2015, alle ore 05:21, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> ha scritto:
>
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 05:33:57PM -0800, Ansis Atteka wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
>>> Until now, if both STP and RSTP were enabled, ovs-vswitchd would actually
>>> enable only the one it first noticed to be enabled, and actually turn off
>>> the setting for the other one in the database (!). This doesn't match
>>> ovs-vswitchd behavior for other contradictory configurations, so this
>>> commit changes its behavior so that, if both are enabled, RSTP takes
>>> precedence.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Daniele Venturino <daniele.ventur...@m3s.it>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Ansis Atteka <aatt...@nicira.com>
>>
>> One small comment below.
>
> Thanks!
>
>>> + if (enable_rstp && enable_stp) {
>>> + VLOG_WARN("%s: RSTP and STP are mutually exclusive but both are "
>>> + "configured; enabling RSTP", br->name);
>> Would you need to rate limit this VLOG_WARN() now?
>
> Most of the log messages in bridge.c that trigger on reconfiguration are
> not rate-limited. I seem to recall that my rationale was that
> reconfiguration itself usually happens at a limited rate, and that it's
> best to get a complete dump of configuration problems at each step
> (especially since we often tell people to check the log when there's a
> problem).
>
> That policy is something to ponder though.
>
> Anyway, I applied this to master. Thanks again for the review.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
