On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 08:37:26PM -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> bridge_delete_or_reconfigure() deletes every interface that's not dumped
> by OFPROTO_PORT_FOR_EACH().  ofproto_dpif.c:port_dump_next(), used by
> OFPROTO_PORT_FOR_EACH, checks if the ofport is in the datapath by
> calling port_query_by_name().  If port_query_by_name() returns an error,
> the dump is interrupted.  If port_query_by_name() returns ENODEV, the
> device doesn't exist and the dump can continue.
> 
> port_query_by_name() for the userspace datapath returns ENOENT instead
> of ENODEV.  This is expected by dpif_port_query_by_name(), but it's not
> handled correctly by port_dump_next().
> 
> This commit fixes the problem by handling ENOENT like ENODEV.
> 
> dpif-netdev handles reconfiguration errors for an interface by deleting
> it from the datapath, so it's possible that a device is missing. When this
> happens we must make sure that port_dump_next() continues to dump other
> devices otherwise they will be deleted and the two layers will have an
> inconsistent view.
> 
> The problem was found while developing new code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniele Di Proietto <[email protected]>

I'm not sure whether there's a difference in meaning between ENOENT and
ENODEV when it comes from these functions.  I wonder whether the dpif
layer should translate one of them into the other, for callers'
convenience.

Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to