On 5/14/24 09:50, Chandler Wu wrote:
> Hi, IIya, thanks for the attention.
>
> If I create a zone for the first time, the new tp_cfg will be copied
> to the zone, see `ct_zone_alloc`. Then update_timeout_policy will check
> that the new copied tp equals to tp_cfg, so ofproto_ct_set_zone_timeout_policy
> will not got called. Or you can check tag v3.0.0 or before. There's no such
> issue for these versions.
Ah, that makes sense. Please, add this information to the commit message
before sending v2.
Please, also add the following tag:
Fixes: 1b3557f53dbc ("vswitchd, ofproto-dpif: Propagate the CT limit from
database.")
For the code itself:
Maybe we should remove the get_timeout_policy_from_ovsrec() call from
ct_zone_alloc() instead of adding ofproto_ct_set_zone_timeout_policy()?
If we do not initialize it, the update_timeout_policy() later should
sync it correctly. What do you think?
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
>
> Best regards.
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 5:11 AM Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@ovn.org
> <mailto:i.maxim...@ovn.org>> wrote:
>
> On 5/6/24 06:05, Chandler Wu wrote:
> > From 5b4d479a9083272e56c51ef9521e6ef665dd534d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: chandlerwu <chandler0...@gmail.com
> <mailto:chandler0...@gmail.com>>
> > Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 11:58:21 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH] Subject:[PATCH] fix ct tp policy when create zone.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: chandlerwu <chandler0...@gmail.com
> <mailto:chandler0...@gmail.com>>
> > ---
> > vswitchd/bridge.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/vswitchd/bridge.c b/vswitchd/bridge.c
> > index 95a65fcdc..e60359b59 100644
> > --- a/vswitchd/bridge.c
> > +++ b/vswitchd/bridge.c
> > @@ -766,6 +766,8 @@ ct_zones_reconfigure(struct datapath *dp, struct
> ovsrec_datapath *dp_cfg)
> > if (!ct_zone) {
> > ct_zone = ct_zone_alloc(zone_id, tp_cfg);
> > hmap_insert(&dp->ct_zones, &ct_zone->node,
> hash_int(zone_id, 0));
> > + ofproto_ct_set_zone_timeout_policy(dp->type,
> ct_zone->zone_id,
> > + &ct_zone->tp);
> > }
> >
> > struct simap new_tp = SIMAP_INITIALIZER(&new_tp);
>
> Hi, Chandler Wu. Thanks for the patch!
>
> But could you, please, explain what is the issue you're trying to fix?
>
> Reading the code, it seems that update_timeout_policy() call later in
> the function should correctly set the policy. Is that not happening?
>
> Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
