On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:10 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > @@ -2195,18 +2191,37 @@ ovn_port_update_sbrec(struct northd_context *ctx, > if (op->derived) { > const char *redirect_chassis = smap_get(&op->nbrp->options, > "redirect-chassis"); > - if (op->nbrp->n_gateway_chassis && redirect_chassis) { > + if (op->nbrp->ha_chassis_group && > + (op->nbrp->n_gateway_chassis || redirect_chassis)) { > + char *msg; > + if (op->nbrp->n_gateway_chassis && redirect_chassis) { > + msg = "gateway_chassis and redirect-chassis"; > + } else if (op->nbrp->n_gateway_chassis) { > + msg = "gateway_chassis"; > + } else { > + msg = "redirect-chassis"; > + } > + > static struct vlog_rate_limit rl = VLOG_RATE_LIMIT_INIT(1, > 1); > VLOG_WARN_RL( > - &rl, "logical router port %s has both options:" > - "redirect-chassis and gateway_chassis populated " > - "redirect-chassis will be ignored in favour of " > - "gateway chassis", op->nbrp->name); > + &rl, "logical router port %s has " > + "ha_chassis_group and %s populated. " > + "%s will be ignored in favour of " > + "ha_chassis_group", op->nbrp->name, msg, msg); > }
Thanks for updating the warning. It is better than before, but still one combination is not covered: if user configured redirect-chassis + gateway_chassis, without ha_chassis_group, it would still be better to warn that "gateway-chassis" is prefered over "redirect-chassis". It may be simpler to just check the three conditions with a counter, and if counter > 1, just print same message about the preference order. This is very minor problem. So: Acked-by: Han Zhou <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
