On 7/7/21 8:41 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote: > On 7/6/21 3:36 PM, Flavio Leitner wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 03:27:41PM +0200, Adrian Moreno wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 7/6/21 2:50 PM, Flavio Leitner wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 08:25:59AM +0200, Adrian Moreno wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/5/21 4:15 PM, Flavio Leitner wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 05:43:54PM +0200, Adrian Moreno wrote: >>>>>>> The match keyword "igmp" is not supported in ofp-parse, which means >>>>>>> that flow dumps cannot be restored. This patch prints the igmp match >>>>>>> in the accepted format (ip,nw_proto=2) and adds a test. >>>>>> >>>>>> I raised concerns about changing the output and break scripts in >>>>>> the past. However, it seems not removing the keyword also cause >>>>>> issues, so I am not opposing to remove the igmp keyword anymore. >>>>>> >>>>>> Acked-by: Flavio Leitner <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Flavio. Do you think this is an acceptable solution also for >>>>> stable branches? >>>> >>>> My concern is that changing the output can potentially break >>>> somebody else's script and that is really bad in a stable >>>> release update. >>>> >>>> BTW, this is an user visible change, so I'd say that the patch >>>> needs to highlight that in the NEWS file too. >>>> >>> OK. I'll send another update, thanks. >>> >>>> >>>>> If not, how about replacing the flows in ovs-save so that upgrades of >>>>> stable >>>>> branches work fine? >>>> >>>> You mean fixing ovs-save in master or in stable branches? >>>> >>> My proposal was: >>> - changing the output + advertise in NEWS in master branch (and future >>> releases) >>> - add a workaround in ovs-save in stable branches to ensure they can be >>> upgraded >>> without big datapath impact >>> >>> WDYT? >> >> Sounds like a good plan to me. > > Sounds good to me too. This way we will change the behavior in current > release and will fix the existing issue in ovs-save on stable branches. > > Adrian, could you send a v2 as a patch set where the first patch implements > a workaround in ovs-save (this one we will apply to master and backport) > and the second patch changes the actual output (and removes the workaround > from ovs-save?) ? >
Will do, thanks Ilya > Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > -- Adrián Moreno _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
