On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:30:08PM +0100, Mijo Safradin wrote: > > > >>It fails on master and on older git versions as well. Even using Debian Sid, > >>the same errors could be observed. Can you provide hardware details about > >>the power/s390 machines the mentioned test has been executed on? > > > >Basics about the machines are in the Debian machine database: > > > >The mips machine: https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=corelli > >The powerpc machine: https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=poulenc > >The s390 machine: https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi?host=zandonai > > > > thanks > > >>When using the openvswitch-2.3.0.tar.gz release, most of the failed test do > >>pass, but other tests do fail. > > > >All the tests you show failing below relate to ssl. This is probably > >unrelated to endianness. Please take a look at the testsuite log to > >find the details. > > > >>Here's a subset of test which do fail on master and passed on 2.3.0 > > > >I'd suggest doing a "git bisect" run to find the point at which tests > >started failing due to endian problems. > > > > Ok, I did 'git bisect' for the first failing test case, which is > 'flow classifier - lookup segmentation' > No. 79 on master > No. 78 at bisect bad commit > > ... > [root@s390x ovs-test]# git bisect bad > a64759f02d8324caf6c37af0ac4e3e1d26e02a43 is the first bad commit > commit a64759f02d8324caf6c37af0ac4e3e1d26e02a43 > Author: Jarno Rajahalme <jrajaha...@nicira.com> > Date: Fri Jun 13 10:38:05 2014 -0700 > > lib/classifier: Optimize megaflows for single rule case. > > When, during a classifier lookup, we narrow down to a single potential > rule, it is enough to match on ("unwildcard") one bit that differs > between the packet and the rule. > > This is a special case of the more general algorithm, where it is > sufficient to match on enough bits that separates the packet from all > higher priority rules than the matched rule. For a miss that would be > all the rules. Implementing this is expensive for a more than a few > rules. This patch starts by doing this for a single rule when we > already have it, also reducing the lookup cost by finishing the lookup > earlier than before. > > Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <jrajaha...@nicira.com> > Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> > > :040000 040000 e912f31d212ce362445ee961447e1bc3c7ff393a > d0006051050c1e73a83811909f583d7d38b73229 M lib > :040000 040000 2cbd9fba63166d7037843de87d150a4b47a79260 > be70c481bc5241662029436eb79b520f6067512f M tests > ... > > It looks like the patch is not part of the 2.3.0 release, which > explains why the test doesn't fail using this release. > > The fact that 'maskp' comes in LE order doesen't hurt here.
Thanks for narrowing it down. Jarno, can you take a look and figure out a nice way to make this code work properly on both little-endian and big-endian systems? Thanks, Ben. _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
