Hi,
On 01/02/24 5:15 am, Numan Siddique wrote:
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:13 AM Priyankar Jain
wrote:
Currently load balancer applied to a logical switch has the
following restriction:
- VIP of the load balancer cannot reside in the subnet prefix as the
clients as OVN does not install ARP
Hi,
On 02/02/24 8:44 am, Mark Michelson wrote:
Hi Priyankar,
I'm not sure I understand the purpose of this patch. Even without this
patch, you could configure whatever IP address you want in the
ip_port_mappings as the source address for the health checks. I don't
see anything in the code
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 9:41 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 4:12 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 5:54 PM Han Zhou wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:15 AM Ilya Maximets
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2/5/24 15:45, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > > > On
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 4:12 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 5:54 PM Han Zhou wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:15 AM Ilya Maximets
wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2/5/24 15:45, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > > On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > >> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 5:54 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:15 AM Ilya Maximets wrote:
> >
> > On 2/5/24 15:45, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > >> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> > >>> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
> > On Sun,
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:15 AM Ilya Maximets wrote:
>
> On 2/5/24 15:45, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> >> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> >>> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
> >
> >
On 12/14/23 16:29, Ales Musil wrote:
> The fields that are not directly supported by OvS were encoded
> via additional controller action that changed the required value.
> This was most notably needed for ICMP need frag messages.
>
> Encode the field value loads as note action instead. This
On 2/5/24 15:45, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>>> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:53 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>>
>> On Sun,
On 2/5/24 12:10, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 2/5/24 11:58, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>> On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at
On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:53 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 5:46 AM Ilya Maximets wrote:
Bleep bloop. Greetings Roberto Bartzen Acosta, I am a robot and I have tried
out your patch.
Thanks for your contribution.
I encountered some error that I wasn't expecting. See the details below.
git-am:
error: sha1 information is lacking or useless
Updating the reference documentation with the inclusion of possible building
problems with libjemalloc and solution suggestions.
Reported-at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openvswitch/+bug/2015748
Signed-off-by: Roberto Bartzen Acosta
---
Documentation/intro/install/general.rst | 16
Thanks for the review Eelco,
Em seg., 5 de fev. de 2024 às 04:32, Eelco Chaudron
escreveu:
>
>
> On 5 Feb 2024, at 2:24, Roberto Bartzen Acosta via dev wrote:
>
> > Updating the reference documentation with the inclusion of possible
> building
> > problems with libjemalloc and solution
netdev_linux_get_speed needs to lock netdev_linux->mutex, and so do the
internal tc operations. Therefore, the former cannot be called from the
latter.
Create a lock-free version of netdev_linux_get_speed() and call it from
tc operations.
Also expand the unit test to cover queues where ceil is
On 2 Feb 2024, at 13:46, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Branches 2.17/3.0/3.1/3.2 are using newer DPDK LTS releases.
>
> Update the faq.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
> ---
Thanks for getting all DPDK packages upgraded. The changes look good to me. Did
not run the GitHub actions, but assume they
On 2 Feb 2024, at 13:46, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 22.11.4.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Thanks for getting all DPDK packages upgraded. The changes look good to me. Did
not run the GitHub actions, but assume they are fine.
Acked-by: Eelco Chaudron
On 2 Feb 2024, at 13:46, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 22.11.4.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
> ---
Thanks for getting all DPDK packages upgraded. The changes look good to me. Did
not run the GitHub actions, but assume they are fine.
Acked-by: Eelco Chaudron
On 2/2/24 15:37, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
On 2 Feb 2024, at 15:16, Aaron Conole wrote:
+OVS_USDT_PROBE(revalidate, flow_result, reason, udpif, ukey);
I have been experimenting with several upcall tracking techniques
that would make it easier to correlate upcalls with their
On 2 Feb 2024, at 13:46, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 21.11.6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Thanks for getting all DPDK packages upgraded. The changes look good to me. Did
not run the GitHub actions, but assume they are fine.
Acked-by: Eelco Chaudron
On 2 Feb 2024, at 13:46, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 21.11.6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
> ---
Thanks for getting all DPDK packages upgraded. The changes look good to me. Did
not run the GitHub actions, but assume they are fine.
Acked-by: Eelco Chaudron
On 2/5/24 11:58, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>>> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:53 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>>
>> On Sun,
On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 08:20:54AM +0100, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>
>
> On 4 Feb 2024, at 15:40, Timothy Redaelli wrote:
>
> > A log message like this one:
> >
> > 2024-01-09T06:45:17.201Z|00071|bfd(handler2)|INFO|ovn-0af536-0: BFD state
> > change: down->up "Neighbor Signaled Session
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 05:48:03PM +0100, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 2/2/24 16:38, Simon Horman wrote:
> > Since the patch-set that included [1] there has been a policy of using
> > the term member for bonds, LACP, and bundle contexts. This is
> > consistent with the more recently adopted policy
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 12:46:17PM +, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Branches 2.17/3.0/3.1/3.2 are using newer DPDK LTS releases.
>
> Update the faq.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Acked-by: Simon Horman
___
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 12:46:16PM +, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 22.11.4.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Acked-by: Simon Horman
___
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 12:46:15PM +, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 22.11.4.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Acked-by: Simon Horman
___
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 12:46:14PM +, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 21.11.6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Acked-by: Simon Horman
___
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 12:46:13PM +, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> Update the CI and docs to use DPDK 21.11.6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor
Acked-by: Simon Horman
___
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
On 2/5/24 11:34, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
>> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:53 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 5:46 AM Ilya Maximets wrote:
On 2/5/24 09:23, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:53 PM Han Zhou wrote:
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 5:46 AM Ilya Maximets wrote:
>
> 35 files changed, 9681
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:47 AM Ales Musil wrote:
> There are 3 flows for matching ECMP symmetric reply that are different
> in a single match part that is the protocol (udp/tcp/sctp) for ct.new
> traffic and additional 3 flows (udp/tcp/sctp) for ct.est && !ct.rpl.
>
> Remove the protocol
Bleep bloop. Greetings Ales Musil, I am a robot and I have tried out your
patch.
Thanks for your contribution.
I encountered some error that I wasn't expecting. See the details below.
checkpatch:
WARNING: The subject summary should end with a dot.
Subject: northd: Remove the protocol match
There are 3 flows for matching ECMP symmetric reply that are different
in a single match part that is the protocol (udp/tcp/sctp) for ct.new
traffic and additional 3 flows (udp/tcp/sctp) for ct.est && !ct.rpl.
Remove the protocol requirement from those flows and merge the
remaining two onto
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 2:02 AM Roberto Bartzen Acosta via dev <
ovs-dev@openvswitch.org> wrote:
> This commit fixes the prefix filter function as the return condition for
> IPv6 addresses is disabling the advertisement of all learned prefixes
> regardless of the match with the blacklist or not.
>
On 2/2/24 22:13, Numan Siddique wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 11:50 AM Mark Michelson wrote:
>>
>> ---
>> NEWS | 4 ++--
>> configure.ac | 2 +-
>> debian/changelog | 4 ++--
>> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> With your signed-off-by tag added
>
>
On 2/5/24 08:13, Han Zhou wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:26 PM Numan Siddique wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 9:53 PM Han Zhou wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 5:46 AM Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>>
35 files changed, 9681 insertions(+), 4645 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>
36 matches
Mail list logo
