On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 07:36:25AM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 20:05, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:00:31AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >>On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 07:32:02AM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote:
> >>>From: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com>
> >>>Always implement get_ifindex without checking if offload is
> >>>enabled or not as this should not be related. From ovs-dpctl
> >>>we cannot tell if offload is enabled or not as other_config is
> >>>not being read.
> >>>Signed-off-by: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com>
> >>>Reviewed-by: Roi Dayan <r...@mellanox.com>
> >>Applied to master and branch-2.8, thanks!
> >Sorry, I had to revert this because it caused several unit test
> >failures: 770 781 783 787 788 791 2189 2378.
> This is because of the warnings from get_ifindex which resolved in
> the second patch but was missing the ratelimiting you mentioned.
> I submitted V2 of it to add back the ratelimiting
> "netdev-linux: Reduce log level for ENODEV errors getting ifindex"
In that case shouldn't the patch order be reversed to avoid
the (temporary) regression Ben pointed out?
dev mailing list