On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 05:45:34PM -0300, Flavio Leitner wrote: > On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:37:06 -0700 > Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 05:33:25PM -0300, Flavio Leitner wrote: > > > On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 12:58:37 -0700 > > > Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 03:57:20PM -0300, Flavio Leitner wrote: > > > > > The ofproto-dpif creates dummies backed by sockets so depending > > > > > on the order of execution when bridge is reconfiguring, an > > > > > active socket may run first and not find the file. That is > > > > > usually not a problem because it will try to reconnect one > > > > > second later. However, it breaks the testsuite. > > > > > > > > > > This patch fixes the issue splitting active and passive sockets > > > > > in different vsctl-ctl commands that guarantees the proper > > > > > ordering between them. > > > > > > > > WAIT_FOR_DUMMY_PORTS is supposed to avoid this problem, by waiting > > > > until the ports have connected. Is it busted? > > > > > > No, but it takes at least one extra second for the port to > > > reconnect. If we consider the four tests fixed by the patch, it can > > > be 4 extra seconds to complete the same tests, so I'd just go with > > > the proposed patch. > > > > OK, I buy that, but in that case the commit message goes overboard > > when it says that the current form "breaks the testsuite". Can you > > rephrase this as an optimization rather than a bug fix, then? > > Not really because it is a bug fix. Those tests break like 7 out of 10 > times on a s390x.
OK, so WAIT_FOR_DUMMY_PORTS is buggy then, can we figure out why and fix it? Optimizations are fine too but I'd like to get to the root of the problem. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
