The first version wasn't quite right. Here's a fixed version.
--8<--cut here-->8--
From: Ben Pfaff
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:50:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] ovsdb-idl: Fix atomicity of writes that don't change a
column's value.
The existing ovsdb_id
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:17:19PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> Before this patch the kernel chose the lowest available number for
> newly created datapath ports. This patch moves the port number
> choosing responsibility to user space, and implements a least
> recently used port number queue in
> I think that we can avoid the loop with a 1024-bit bitmap. That's
> only 128 bytes, which is small change next to the 2048-byte
> lru_ports array, so I think that we might as well do it. We
> already have bitmap helpers in bitmap.h, so it should be really
> easy to do.
That's a
Before this patch the kernel chose the lowest available number for
newly created datapath ports. This patch moves the port number
choosing responsibility to user space, and implements a least
recently used port number queue in an attempt to avoid reuse.
Bug #2140.
---
lib/dpif-linux.c | 65 +++
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 06:08:23PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> > I think that we can avoid the loop with a 1024-bit bitmap. That's
> > only 128 bytes, which is small change next to the 2048-byte
> > lru_ports array, so I think that we might as well do it. We
> > already have bitmap
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 06:09:04PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> Before this patch the kernel chose the lowest available number for
> newly created datapath ports. This patch moves the port number
> choosing responsibility to user space, and implements a least
> recently used port number queue in
The incremental looks good to me. I'll go ahead and merge it with it
applied (after I test it). Assuming you think the patch is ok
otherwise.
Ethan
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 06:09:04PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
>> Before this patch the kernel c
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 08:35:15PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> The incremental looks good to me. I'll go ahead and merge it with it
> applied (after I test it). Assuming you think the patch is ok
> otherwise.
Yes, I thought it looked fine. Thank you!
___
Thanks, I merged this.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 08:35:15PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
>> The incremental looks good to me. I'll go ahead and merge it with it
>> applied (after I test it). Assuming you think the patch is ok
>> otherwise.
>
> Yes,
---
ChangeLog| 82
configure.ac |2 +-
debian/changelog | 85 ++
vswitchd/vswitch.xml |4 +-
4 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ChangeL
10 matches
Mail list logo
