On 11.10.2024 22:59, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
Sorry for the confusion. I was trying to suggest to bump the submodule on all OVN stable branches to the current tip of a stable OVS release branch. That's what I think our documentation suggests: https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn/blob/main/Documentation/internals/ovs_submodule.rst#submodules-for-releases Right now we have this: 24.09: c598c05c85b2 ("Set release date for 3.4.0.") 24.03: f19448b86189 ("github: Update python to 3.12.") - branch-3.3 23.09: c88a35fc29f0 ("github: Update python to 3.12.") - branch-3.2 23.03: 8fd5f77cd84e ("ovsdb-idl: Preserve change_seqno when deleting rows.") - branch-3.1 22.12: 8fd5f77cd84e ("ovsdb-idl: Preserve change_seqno when deleting rows.") - branch-3.1 22.09: 94191b7a4926 ("ovsdb-idl: Preserve change_seqno when deleting rows.") - branch-3.0 22.06: 94191b7a4926 ("ovsdb-idl: Preserve change_seqno when deleting rows.") - branch-3.0 22.03: 94191b7a4926 ("ovsdb-idl: Preserve change_seqno when deleting rows.") - branch-3.0 We could bump the submodule on all these branches to the tip of the OVS branch they're already tracking and I think we should be fine. OVS commit 335a5deac3ff ("ovs-atomic: Fix inclusion of Clang header by GCC 14.") was backported to all branches down to branch-3.0. If yes, I've got a question: shouldn't we bump to f59f19bf6 (ovsdb-idl: Fix IDL memory leak.) instead? If we do what I suggest above we'll also get this fix. Our documentation also says: " For choice 1, the decision of whether to update the submodule commit to OVS branch-Z is based on several factors. Is OVN release X still being supported? Is there any known benefit to updating the submodule? E.g., are there performance improvements we could take advantage of by updating the submodule? Is there risk in updating the submodule? " While I understand it's riskier to bump to the tip of the stable OVS branch (potentially across minor OVS versions) the alternative of bumping strictly to the commit that fixes the compilation error also carries some risks: we might be missing follow up fixes that went in afterwards. However, I didn't do a thorough review yet of what other commits we'd be picking up on each branch. I'll try to do that when the patches are posted. What do you think? Thanks for the detailed description! I've read through the ovs_submodule document and your suggestion is almost what I wanted to do. One note is that I'd propose to bump branch-3.4, branch-3.3, branch-3.2 and branch-3.1 -based OVN branches to commit "ofproto-dpif: Improve load balancing in dp_hash select groups." as it is the tip of these branches. And branch-3.0 -based OVN branches to bump to a9fb87867 "selinux: Update policy file." commit. After all autotests pass, I can submit patches. Do you see such approach reasonable? -- Regards, Vladislav Odintsov _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
