Hi Sai, Here is the build with your patch and sleep 2:
https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/l2switch/job/l2switch-csit-1node-switch-only-boron/819/ BR/Luis > On Oct 21, 2016, at 4:02 AM, Sai MarapaReddy <sai.marapare...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Luis, > > https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/jenkins092/l2switch-csit-1node-switch-only-boron/798/archives/karaf.log.gz > > <https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/jenkins092/l2switch-csit-1node-switch-only-boron/798/archives/karaf.log.gz> > > At around time stamp 2016-10-21 08:51:21,269 in the above build, shows some > addresses in MD-SAL data tree which are identical to the addresses that are > going to be created (when a mininet is re-connected). > > Please run the patch [1] against csit jobs which has a sleep of 2 seconds in > between mininet connection / disconnection. > If we don't see any existing addresses in data tree, we can confirm the cause > of the issue. > > [1] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47186/ > <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47186/> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Luis Gomez <ece...@gmail.com > <mailto:ece...@gmail.com>> wrote: > (Resending with less content and changing title) > > Here is the run with your patch: > > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/job/l2switch-csit-1node-switch-only-boron/795/ > > <https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/job/l2switch-csit-1node-switch-only-boron/795/> > > Please let us know if we can help with anything. > > BR/Luis > >> On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:54 AM, Sai MarapaReddy <sai.marapare...@gmail.com >> <mailto:sai.marapare...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Done. Thanks Jamo. >> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Jamo Luhrsen <jluhr...@gmail.com >> <mailto:jluhr...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 10/19/2016 11:26 PM, Sai MarapaReddy wrote: >>> > Address tracker tries [1] to read any existing address from data store. >>> > My guess is in the case of immediate restart of >>> > mininet , addresses from data store are not cleaned and this is why we >>> > see all addresses. >>> > >>> > In further attempt to verify this information I have a patch here [2]. I >>> > tried running it with keyword "test-l2switch-all" >>> > but no success. Could you please run it. This might help in >>> > troubleshooting the issue further. >>> >>> it's because we don't have a patch test job for l2switch yet. It's >>> something projects are adding >>> on an as-needed basis. I gave you one here: >>> >>> https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47219/ >>> <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47219/> >>> >>> give it a +1 and we can try to get it merged. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> JamO >>> >>> >>> > [1] >>> > https://github.com/opendaylight/l2switch/blob/stable/boron/addresstracker/implementation/src/main/java/org/opendaylight/l2switch/addresstracker/addressobserver/AddressObservationWriter.java#L116 >>> > >>> > <https://github.com/opendaylight/l2switch/blob/stable/boron/addresstracker/implementation/src/main/java/org/opendaylight/l2switch/addresstracker/addressobserver/AddressObservationWriter.java#L116> >>> > >>> > [2] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47186/ >>> > <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/47186/> >>> > >>> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Luis Gomez <ece...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ece...@gmail.com> <mailto:ece...@gmail.com >>> > <mailto:ece...@gmail.com>>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi Sai, after looking at the test more in detail this is not exactly >>> > the behavior (sorry for the confusion), what is >>> > really happening is: >>> > >>> > - Mininet restarts >>> > - There is no host in address-tracker after restart >>> > - We do the classic mininet pingall test >>> > - After the pingall test the host addresses (10.0.0.1, 10.0.0.2, >>> > 10.0.0.3) are seen in all switches, while in normal >>> > scenario 10.0.0.1 should be only in s1 to-host port, 10.0.0.2 should >>> > be only in s2 to-host port and 10.0.0.3 should be >>> > only in s3 to-host port. >>> > >>> > The normal scenario happens when we leave 2 secs between mininet stop >>> > + start. >>> > >>> > So 2 questions: >>> > >>> > - What is the impact of address tracker registering remote IP >>> > addresses in the switch-to-switch ports? As far as I can >>> > see flows are generated correctly even in this case. >>> > - Any idea why the address tracker would get confused and add IP >>> > addresses to the switch-to-switch ports? maybe the >>> > application fails to identify these ports as going switch-to-switch? >>> > >>> > BR/Luis >>> > > >
_______________________________________________ L2switch-dev mailing list L2switch-dev@lists.opendaylight.org https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/l2switch-dev
