On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 08:05:33AM -0800, Guru Shetty wrote: > On 31 January 2016 at 23:24, Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@samsung.com> wrote: > > > On 29.01.2016 22:02, Guru Shetty wrote: > > > This reverts commit 9b5422a98f817b9f2a1f8224cab7e1a8d0bbba1f. > > > > > > Reason: > > > Calling 'ovs-appctl exit' on ovs-vswitchd will cause ovs-vswitchd > > > to destroy all the ports from the datapath. This is an unacceptable > > > behavior while restarting the daemons. > > > > Killing is more unacceptable here, because ovs with vhost-user port will > > not be able to open this port anymore. > > > If 'ovs-appctl exit' solves the above problem, can one could argue that > killing the daemon via SIGTERM should do the same? i.e you should register > the cleanup functions that is so important for proper functioning after > restart (irrespective of how this particular problem is solved). > > > > > > > Couple of reasons that come > > > to mind are: > > > > > > 1. Any configured ip addresses will be lost > > > > Why this can't be solved using network-scripts or something else? > > > This is very hard since OVS runs on multiple hypervisors each with > different way of configuring interfaces. > > > > > > > 2. Traffic will stop flowing. > > > > I think, this was just a side effect. IMHO, stop of traffic flowing > > is an expected behaviour while you restarting the switch. > > > When OVS daemons are restarted, the flows in the kernel remain making old > traffic continue to flow. There has been quite a bit of effort done to > prevent traffic disruption during upgrades so you cannot introduce a > regression here. > > > I think it is probably easier to prevent 'ovs-appctl exit' from deleting > the bridges in the first place.
I'm going to try for that first. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
