I've got a lot more code I can upstream, but I haven't seen any reviews for the first patch. Any comments? (Or did I submit it incorrectly?)
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Casey Barker <crbar...@google.com> wrote: > OK, I just sent a patch, and I'll try to post more as time allows. > Unfortunately, I'm working from a non-git repo, based off a stale snapshot > of OVS, with layers of local hacks and cruft dating back to OVS 0.9 (WDP!). > So it's a bit harder than it should be to upstream this stuff. > > Ben, I don't mean to cause you grief. :) Having _any_ implementation of > groups upstream would make my life much easier, and I'll happily take > whatever you've got brewing in lieu of mine. My only real concerns are that > the ofproto-provider API abstracts the wire protocol and supports async ops. > > Thanks, > Casey > > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > >> Now it's *my* ugly uptime merge ;-( >> >> On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:04:52PM -0700, Casey Barker wrote: >> > Nothing like the threat of an ugly upstream merge. :) >> > >> > The bucket management and the ofproto-provider are what I really care >> > about, so I'll post those asap. >> > >> > Casey >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >> > >> > > I've seen that there's nothing like proposing an implementation of a >> > > feature to make other implementations appear. >> > > >> > > Sure, please send what you have. If there's more than one choice then >> > > let the best code win. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > Ben. >> > > >> > > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:55:20PM -0700, Casey Barker wrote: >> > > > Hi Ben, >> > > > >> > > > I've had a "mostly working" implementation of groups for several >> months, >> > > > but sadly not enough time in my schedule for a proper upstreaming >> > > effort. I >> > > > don't expect to have time for at least a few more weeks. >> > > > >> > > > Would it help if I sent my ofproto and action bucket changes? Those >> were >> > > > the most interesting bits, as I recall. I could probably get those >> out in >> > > > the next few days, but I don't think I have time to carve them up >> into >> > > > small, tractable patches. Or as a baby step, maybe I could at least >> send >> > > > you my ofproto-provider API? >> > > > >> > > > (FYI, the naming of async operation groups as "groups" in ofproto.c >> got >> > > so >> > > > confusing, I had to do a search/replace in my local repository, >> just for >> > > my >> > > > own sanity.) >> > > > >> > > > Casey >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 11:38:57AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: >> > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I would like to announce my intention to work on OF1.1+ Groups >> > > support >> > > > > for >> > > > > > Open vSwtich with a particular focus on supporting the fast >> failover >> > > > > group >> > > > > > type. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I do not wish to tread on any toes so if anyone is already >> working on >> > > > > this >> > > > > > please let me know. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Assuming that is not the case my high-level plan is as follows: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 1. Test and as necessary fix >> > > > > > "[groups RFC 2/2] Implement OpenFLow 1.1+ "groups" >> protocol."[1] >> > > > > > by Neil Zhu. >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm working on this myself and made some progress. I'll try to >> post a >> > > > > new version this week. >> > > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > dev mailing list >> > > > > dev@openvswitch.org >> > > > > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >> > > > > >> > > >> > >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
