On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Han Zhou <zhou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This change should belong to the 1/3 patch. Each individual patch should
> be complete and independent to future patches.
>
This part is an RFC, so I was trying to make it easier to digest.
Normally, this would be part of patch 1, for the reason patch 1 breaks this
test - that is one rule
we use.
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Darrell Ball <dlu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If arp responders are unnecessay for logical switch
>> "router type" ports. then an adjustment is necessary
>> for a test.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Darrell Ball <dlu...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> tests/ovn.at | 4 +---
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/ovn.at b/tests/ovn.at
>> index f40940f..aff1a39 100644
>> --- a/tests/ovn.at
>> +++ b/tests/ovn.at
>> @@ -2208,9 +2208,7 @@ test_arp() {
>> local j k
>> for j in 1 2 3; do
>> for k in 1 2 3; do
>> - # 192.168.33.254 is configured to the switch patch port for
>> lrp33,
>> - # so no ARP flooding expected for it.
>> - if test $i$j$k != $inport && test $tpa != `ip_to_hex 192 168
>> 33 254`; then
>> + if test $i$j$k != $inport; then
>> echo $request >> $i$j$k.expected
>> fi
>> done
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dev mailing list
>> dev@openvswitch.org
>> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
