Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Flavio Leitner]

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 09:59:30PM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Russell Bryant  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Flavio Leitner  wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> >> > On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it
> >> being considered a set of fixes ...
> >> > >
> >> > > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in
> >> RHEL
> >> > > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
> >> > > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
> >> > > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
> >> > >
> >> > > -Aaron
> >> >
> >> > Hi Aaron,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
> >> > it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
> >> > view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
> >> > these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.
> >>
> >>
> >> Most of the changes are transparent and should not cause any issues.
> >>
> >> I say most of the changes because the problem is if someone is relying
> >> on the openvswitch-nonetwork service state.  In that case, the service
> >> doesn't exist anymore after the patchset, so it might break something.
> >>
> >> I am not sure if we care about that because that service should be
> >> considered internal to OVS (used only by ifcfg scripts).  The front end
> >> is the openvswitch.service which remains available.
> >>
> >> Regarding to be a new feature or bugfix, I think this is a bugfix for
> >> two things at least.
> >>
> >> 1) The real service state is represented by openvswitch service.
> >> Before the patchset there were situations where the OVS threads were
> >> dead but the systemd service was up & running.  The patchset intends
> >> to fix this issue.
> >>
> >> 2) The shutdown ordering. Before the patchset we could have OVS shutting
> >> down before other networking services that depends on network.  When OVS
> >> terminates, it breaks networking connectivity causing issues. The patchset
> >> intends to fix the issue as well, though it needs to include the follow up
> >> fix  http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-October/080426.html
> >>
> >> In another words,
> >> Acked-by: Flavio Leitner 
> >>
> >
> > I'm fine with these backports.  I'll wait until we have the follow-up
> > patch applied to master, which is pending your (Flavio's) Signed-off-by.
> >
> 
> As requested, the following commits have been backported to branch-2.5.
> Let me know if you run into any issues with the backports.
> 
> b23b069 ovs-ctl: Remove code for upgrading from Open vSwitch 1.9 and
> earlier.
> bb743b6 ovs-ctl: Allow selective start for db and switch
> 85aa123 utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Only add_managers with vswitchd
> 8dfa293 utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Allow non-monitoring daemons
> af3f8b0 rhel/ovsdb-server.service: Rename the nonetwork service
> 3704d06 rhel: Improved Systemd Integration
> a3ce77d rhel-systemd: Delay shutting down the services
 
Thanks Russell!

-- 
fbl

___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Russell Bryant]

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Russell Bryant  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Flavio Leitner  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> > On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it
>> being considered a set of fixes ...
>> > >
>> > > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in
>> RHEL
>> > > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
>> > > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
>> > > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
>> > >
>> > > -Aaron
>> >
>> > Hi Aaron,
>> >
>> > Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
>> > it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
>> > view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
>> > these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.
>>
>>
>> Most of the changes are transparent and should not cause any issues.
>>
>> I say most of the changes because the problem is if someone is relying
>> on the openvswitch-nonetwork service state.  In that case, the service
>> doesn't exist anymore after the patchset, so it might break something.
>>
>> I am not sure if we care about that because that service should be
>> considered internal to OVS (used only by ifcfg scripts).  The front end
>> is the openvswitch.service which remains available.
>>
>> Regarding to be a new feature or bugfix, I think this is a bugfix for
>> two things at least.
>>
>> 1) The real service state is represented by openvswitch service.
>> Before the patchset there were situations where the OVS threads were
>> dead but the systemd service was up & running.  The patchset intends
>> to fix this issue.
>>
>> 2) The shutdown ordering. Before the patchset we could have OVS shutting
>> down before other networking services that depends on network.  When OVS
>> terminates, it breaks networking connectivity causing issues. The patchset
>> intends to fix the issue as well, though it needs to include the follow up
>> fix  http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-October/080426.html
>>
>> In another words,
>> Acked-by: Flavio Leitner 
>>
>
> I'm fine with these backports.  I'll wait until we have the follow-up
> patch applied to master, which is pending your (Flavio's) Signed-off-by.
>

As requested, the following commits have been backported to branch-2.5.
Let me know if you run into any issues with the backports.

b23b069 ovs-ctl: Remove code for upgrading from Open vSwitch 1.9 and
earlier.
bb743b6 ovs-ctl: Allow selective start for db and switch
85aa123 utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Only add_managers with vswitchd
8dfa293 utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Allow non-monitoring daemons
af3f8b0 rhel/ovsdb-server.service: Rename the nonetwork service
3704d06 rhel: Improved Systemd Integration
a3ce77d rhel-systemd: Delay shutting down the services

-- 
Russell Bryant
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Russell Bryant]

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Flavio Leitner  wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> > >
> > >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it
> being considered a set of fixes ...
> > >
> > > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
> > > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
> > > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
> > > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
> > >
> > > -Aaron
> >
> > Hi Aaron,
> >
> > Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
> > it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
> > view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
> > these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.
>
>
> Most of the changes are transparent and should not cause any issues.
>
> I say most of the changes because the problem is if someone is relying
> on the openvswitch-nonetwork service state.  In that case, the service
> doesn't exist anymore after the patchset, so it might break something.
>
> I am not sure if we care about that because that service should be
> considered internal to OVS (used only by ifcfg scripts).  The front end
> is the openvswitch.service which remains available.
>
> Regarding to be a new feature or bugfix, I think this is a bugfix for
> two things at least.
>
> 1) The real service state is represented by openvswitch service.
> Before the patchset there were situations where the OVS threads were
> dead but the systemd service was up & running.  The patchset intends
> to fix this issue.
>
> 2) The shutdown ordering. Before the patchset we could have OVS shutting
> down before other networking services that depends on network.  When OVS
> terminates, it breaks networking connectivity causing issues. The patchset
> intends to fix the issue as well, though it needs to include the follow up
> fix  http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-October/080426.html
>
> In another words,
> Acked-by: Flavio Leitner 
>

I'm fine with these backports.  I'll wait until we have the follow-up patch
applied to master, which is pending your (Flavio's) Signed-off-by.

-- 
Russell Bryant
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Flavio Leitner]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> > 
> >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it being 
> >> considered a set of fixes ...
> > 
> > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
> > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
> > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
> > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
> > 
> > -Aaron
> 
> Hi Aaron,
> 
> Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
> it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
> view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
> these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.


Most of the changes are transparent and should not cause any issues.

I say most of the changes because the problem is if someone is relying
on the openvswitch-nonetwork service state.  In that case, the service
doesn't exist anymore after the patchset, so it might break something.

I am not sure if we care about that because that service should be
considered internal to OVS (used only by ifcfg scripts).  The front end
is the openvswitch.service which remains available.

Regarding to be a new feature or bugfix, I think this is a bugfix for
two things at least.

1) The real service state is represented by openvswitch service.
Before the patchset there were situations where the OVS threads were
dead but the systemd service was up & running.  The patchset intends
to fix this issue.

2) The shutdown ordering. Before the patchset we could have OVS shutting
down before other networking services that depends on network.  When OVS
terminates, it breaks networking connectivity causing issues. The patchset
intends to fix the issue as well, though it needs to include the follow up
fix  http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2016-October/080426.html

In another words,
Acked-by: Flavio Leitner 

-- 
fbl

___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Aaron Conole]

Ben Pfaff  writes:

> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 11:09:39AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> Ben Pfaff  writes:
>> 
>> > On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> >> On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> >> > 
>> >> >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for
>> >> > it being considered a set of fixes ...
>> >> > 
>> >> > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
>> >> > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
>> >> > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
>> >> > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
>> >> > 
>> >> > -Aaron
>> >> 
>> >> Hi Aaron,
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
>> >> it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
>> >> view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
>> >> these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.
>> >
>> > I don't know whether we came to a conclusion on this or whether the
>> > discussion just dropped.  Is it still desirable?
>> 
>> It's definitely desirable from my PoV.  I'd like to see it, and have
>> already gotten it packaged in a local copy of an RPM, just doing some
>> testing.
>> 
>> I don't know if Russell or Flavio have any thoughts.
>
> I'm OK with this backport, but I'll leave it to Russell since ultimately
> it's to improve Red Hat integration.

Quick Update: After some testing, I may have one more patch related to
this.  So we can wait a bit before making a decision, I think.

- Aaron
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Ben Pfaff]

On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 11:09:39AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote:
> Ben Pfaff  writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> >> On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> >> > 
> >> >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for
> >> > it being considered a set of fixes ...
> >> > 
> >> > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
> >> > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
> >> > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
> >> > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
> >> > 
> >> > -Aaron
> >> 
> >> Hi Aaron,
> >> 
> >> Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
> >> it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
> >> view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
> >> these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.
> >
> > I don't know whether we came to a conclusion on this or whether the
> > discussion just dropped.  Is it still desirable?
> 
> It's definitely desirable from my PoV.  I'd like to see it, and have
> already gotten it packaged in a local copy of an RPM, just doing some
> testing.
> 
> I don't know if Russell or Flavio have any thoughts.

I'm OK with this backport, but I'll leave it to Russell since ultimately
it's to improve Red Hat integration.
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Aaron Conole]

Ben Pfaff  writes:

> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> > 
>> >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for
>> > it being considered a set of fixes ...
>> > 
>> > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
>> > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
>> > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
>> > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
>> > 
>> > -Aaron
>> 
>> Hi Aaron,
>> 
>> Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
>> it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
>> view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
>> these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.
>
> I don't know whether we came to a conclusion on this or whether the
> discussion just dropped.  Is it still desirable?

It's definitely desirable from my PoV.  I'd like to see it, and have
already gotten it packaged in a local copy of an RPM, just doing some
testing.

I don't know if Russell or Flavio have any thoughts.

Thanks, Ben!
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Ben Pfaff]

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 07:58:21PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> > 
> >> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it being 
> >> considered a set of fixes ...
> > 
> > I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
> > we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
> > (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
> > run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
> > 
> > -Aaron
> 
> Hi Aaron,
> 
> Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
> it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
> view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
> these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.

I don't know whether we came to a conclusion on this or whether the
discussion just dropped.  Is it still desirable?
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Markos Chandras]

On 09/08/2016 05:50 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> 
>> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it being 
>> considered a set of fixes ...
> 
> I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
> we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
> (maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
> run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)
> 
> -Aaron

Hi Aaron,

Thanks for the backport request. I am also interested in these fixes and
it's something I could use in the SUSE package as well. For my point of
view I see no blockers for those updating their 2.5.0 installations with
these fixes in but I will do some testing on my end as well.

-- 
markos

SUSE LINUX GmbH | GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409, Nürnberg

___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Aaron Conole]

Russell Bryant  writes:

>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Aaron Conole  wrote:
>>
>>  Greetings all,
>>
>>  I'd like to request a backport to branch 2.5 of the following commits:
>>
>>c416eaf8c247225f0ebeb22b6ca5c473e96a53d2 ("ovs-ctl: Remove code for 
>> upgrading...")
>>7fc28c50c0128a0c72853f8f243fd5045bcb9917 ("ovs-ctl: Allow selective start 
>> for...")
>>0cfd47f9dcc3914db8d266ed834d6e2c8fc1a11d ("utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Only 
>> ...")
>>48458307b52d13d37d8f88d91385b732af12939f ("utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Allow 
>> ...")
>>4f6218739ec6ed33b71e5127fe619db13605602d ("rhel/ovsdb-server.service: 
>> Rename ...")
>>84ad120834919c3e0945e3e58e0f96c07efa0316 ("rhel: Improved Systemd 
>> Integration")
>>
>>  These commits are part of a refactor of the systemd integration which
>>  fixes a number of ordering issues when starting and stopping the Open
>>  vSwitch service on Red Hat systems.  One particularly nasty example
>>  would be configuring an internal interface through Open vSwitch with an
>>  address, mounting an NFS share from that address, and then attempting to
>>  shutdown or restart (which would result in a roughly 1/2 hour wait time
>>  to stop).
>>
>>  Apologies if this is considered in-appropriate for the 2.5 branch, or if
>>  no new backport requests are accepted on the 2.5 branch.
>
> What's the upgrade impact of this for someone using 2.5.0 and then moving to 
> a version including
> these commits?

It should be minimal - I haven't tested pre-refactor to post-refactor
2.5.0 extensively, but I will try it out a bit and if I run into
problems I will self nak this (by 9/16/2017).  It certainly didn't cause
problems on rhel, and the ovs-ctl changes are either flag-enabled
(meaning those flags must be present), or the one commit which removes
compat upgrade code from 2013.

> It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it being 
> considered a set of fixes ...

I agree - it straddles a line.  I was hesitant to even ask, but in RHEL
we probably need to backport these anyway, so I made an assumption
(maybe poor) that other systemd distros might use the rhel scripts and
run into this class of issues also.  Good net-izen, and all that :)

-Aaron
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Russell Bryant]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Aaron Conole  wrote:

> Greetings all,
>
> I'd like to request a backport to branch 2.5 of the following commits:
>
>   c416eaf8c247225f0ebeb22b6ca5c473e96a53d2 ("ovs-ctl: Remove code for
> upgrading...")
>   7fc28c50c0128a0c72853f8f243fd5045bcb9917 ("ovs-ctl: Allow selective
> start for...")
>   0cfd47f9dcc3914db8d266ed834d6e2c8fc1a11d ("utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Only
> ...")
>   48458307b52d13d37d8f88d91385b732af12939f ("utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Allow
> ...")
>   4f6218739ec6ed33b71e5127fe619db13605602d ("rhel/ovsdb-server.service:
> Rename ...")
>   84ad120834919c3e0945e3e58e0f96c07efa0316 ("rhel: Improved Systemd
> Integration")
>
> These commits are part of a refactor of the systemd integration which
> fixes a number of ordering issues when starting and stopping the Open
> vSwitch service on Red Hat systems.  One particularly nasty example
> would be configuring an internal interface through Open vSwitch with an
> address, mounting an NFS share from that address, and then attempting to
> shutdown or restart (which would result in a roughly 1/2 hour wait time
> to stop).
>
> Apologies if this is considered in-appropriate for the 2.5 branch, or if
> no new backport requests are accepted on the 2.5 branch.
>

What's the upgrade impact of this for someone using 2.5.0 and then moving
to a version including these commits?

It sounds like new feature territory, but you do make a case for it being
considered a set of fixes ...

-- 
Russell Bryant
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

[ovs-dev] [Backport Request] For branch-2.5, backport rhel-systemd integration

[Aaron Conole]

Greetings all,

I'd like to request a backport to branch 2.5 of the following commits:

  c416eaf8c247225f0ebeb22b6ca5c473e96a53d2 ("ovs-ctl: Remove code for 
upgrading...")
  7fc28c50c0128a0c72853f8f243fd5045bcb9917 ("ovs-ctl: Allow selective start 
for...")
  0cfd47f9dcc3914db8d266ed834d6e2c8fc1a11d ("utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Only ...")
  48458307b52d13d37d8f88d91385b732af12939f ("utilities/ovs-ctl.in: Allow ...")
  4f6218739ec6ed33b71e5127fe619db13605602d ("rhel/ovsdb-server.service: Rename 
...")
  84ad120834919c3e0945e3e58e0f96c07efa0316 ("rhel: Improved Systemd 
Integration")

These commits are part of a refactor of the systemd integration which
fixes a number of ordering issues when starting and stopping the Open
vSwitch service on Red Hat systems.  One particularly nasty example
would be configuring an internal interface through Open vSwitch with an
address, mounting an NFS share from that address, and then attempting to
shutdown or restart (which would result in a roughly 1/2 hour wait time
to stop).

Apologies if this is considered in-appropriate for the 2.5 branch, or if
no new backport requests are accepted on the 2.5 branch.

-Aaron
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev