Hi Ben,

Thanks for the quick reply.

Command that I'm using: ovs-vsctl remove bridge test-br datapath_type netdev
Output message:    ovs-vsctl: "remove" operation would put 0 values in column 
datapath_type of table Bridge but the minimum number is 1

I still think that the empty string is misleading because it suggests the user 
that empty string is a valid entry but apparently you cannot set it back to be 
empty once changed.

Thanks
Toby

On 12/10/18, 3:05 PM, "Ben Pfaff" <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 10:01:48PM +0000, Tobias Hofmann -T (tohofman - 
AAP3 INC at Cisco) via discuss wrote:
    > Hi,
    > 
    > I noticed that the property datapath_type of a freshly created bridge is 
by default empty. In order to support DPDK, I have to set the datapath_type to 
netdev.
    > 
    > Now when I want to disable DPDK, I try to remove the datapath_type
    > again which fails saying that datapath_type cannot be empty.
    
    Can you show us the command you ran and the error message?

           ovs-vsctl: "remove" operation would put 0 values in column 
datapath_type of table Bridge but the minimum number is 1
    
    > This is weird since the datapath_type is initally empty after creating
    > the bridge from scratch.
    > 
    > I saw that there is also the option to set the datapath_type to system 
which is apparently the default setting.
    > So my question is whether the type system is technically the same as no 
entry for the datapath_type at all.
    > If so, wouldn’t it make sense to set the datapath_type as system after 
bridge creation instead of leaving it empty.
    
    The empty string and "system" are synonyms, so there's no reason to
    prefer one or the other.
    

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
  • [ovs-discuss]... Tobias Hofmann -T (tohofman - AAP3 INC at Cisco) via discuss
    • Re: [ovs... Ben Pfaff
      • Re: ... Tobias Hofmann -T (tohofman - AAP3 INC at Cisco) via discuss
        • ... Ben Pfaff

Reply via email to