Acked-by: Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com>
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
> When the ofp_port argument to bundle_add_port() refers to an ofport_dpif
> that already belongs to some other bundle, bundle_add_port() removed
> the port from the other bundle, correctly, with bundle_del_port().
> If the other bundle now contained no ports, however, this violated the
> invariant that a bundle always contains at least one port.
>
> Normally, this would get fixed up when the other bundle was processed
> later during reconfiguration. I haven't quite zeroed in on the exact
> case where this is not true, but segfaults have happened here in
> production, in particular when port adds and deletes happen simultaneously
> and the new port reuses the OpenFlow port number of one of the deleted
> ports. It seems that the duplicate port number allows some port to rip
> away the new port from its bundle without destroying that bundle. I
> suspect, therefore, that there is still a more subtle bug here, but I
> hope that this will fix the segfault.
>
> Bug #18967.
> Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>
> ---
> ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> index f3f87f0..20a180e 100644
> --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c
> @@ -2525,7 +2525,7 @@ bundle_add_port(struct ofbundle *bundle, uint32_t
> ofp_port,
> if (port->bundle != bundle) {
> bundle->ofproto->backer->need_revalidate = REV_RECONFIGURE;
> if (port->bundle) {
> - bundle_del_port(port);
> + bundle_remove(&port->up);
> }
>
> port->bundle = bundle;
> --
> 1.7.10.4
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev@openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
X-CudaMail-Whitelist-To: dev@openvswitch.org
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
