On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 05:32:52PM +0100, Dumitru Ceara wrote: > On 1/13/21 2:56 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote: > > On the side note: don't we need to increase 'cond_seqno' here since > > we're practically dropping one of the condition requests? User might > > wait for this sequence number, but 'req_cond' will be cleared and > > never be acked. > > I think you're right, we should be increasing 'cond_seqno' to match the > logic in ovsdb_cs_db_set_condition() (or ovsdb_idl_db_set_condition() in > the old code). > > I can take care of this as a follow up patch as it seems to be > pre-existing issue of the IDL code.
I found that any minor change to the IDL behavior in this area tended to break ovn-controller, which seems to have really brittle dependencies on exactly how the IDL behaves. Thanks for the reviews. I got the impression from these and from the discussion on IRC this morning that it was OK to push this to master, so I did. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
