> Could you please add a rationale for the change in the commit message?
> Maybe the NEWS file should be updated to reflect the behavior changes
> after the series (tunnel interfaces not set for TC; TC applied to
> interfaces on the same LS...)

I do not think there is any reason to shape the traffic on the tunnel with the
value applied on the localnet port. What do you think?
Yes, I will add this info in NEWS.

> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 10:45 AM Lorenzo Bianconi
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Remove tunnel interfaces from egress list in order to not shape them.
> >
> > Reported-at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2129742
> > Tested-by: Rodolfo Alonso <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  controller/binding.c | 9 ---------
> >  1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/controller/binding.c b/controller/binding.c
> > index 5df62baef..09cf00af3 100644
> > --- a/controller/binding.c
> > +++ b/controller/binding.c
> > @@ -1889,15 +1889,6 @@ build_local_bindings(struct binding_ctx_in *b_ctx_in,
> >                  smap_replace(b_ctx_out->local_iface_ids, iface_rec->name,
> >                               iface_id);
> >              }
> > -
> > -            /* Check if this is a tunnel interface. */
> > -            if (smap_get(&iface_rec->options, "remote_ip")) {
> > -                const char *tunnel_iface
> > -                    = smap_get(&iface_rec->status, "tunnel_egress_iface");
> > -                if (tunnel_iface) {
> > -                    sset_add(b_ctx_out->egress_ifaces, tunnel_iface);
> > -                }
> > -            }
> >          }
> >      }
> >  }
> > --
> > 2.39.2
> >
> 
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to