> On Oct 12, 2016, at 2:57 PM, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 9:10 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 01:27:46PM +, Andrej Leitner wrote:
>>> - what does it mean OpenFlow 1.3+ in notes here
>>
> On Oct 12, 2016, at 9:10 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 01:27:46PM +, Andrej Leitner wrote:
>> - what does it mean OpenFlow 1.3+ in notes here
>> http://openvswitch.org/releases/NEWS-2.6.0?
>
> OpenFlow 1.3 and later.
>
>> - there are bundles mentioned in connection wi
Numan,
This seems to be the right fix. In general, recirculations due to NXT_RESUME
will fail if the packet metadata is not restored prior to the packet execution.
Would you send a patch formatted by git format-patch with your Signed-off-by?
Jarno
> On May 9, 2016, at 1:55 AM, Numan Siddique
t; echo "Flows are added"
>
> echo "Dump-Flows"
> ovs-ofctl dump-flows br-int |wc
> date
>
> end script #
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Alok
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jarno Rajahalme [mailto:ja...@ovn.org]
> Sent: Thurs
the 1 rules, and due to all the
20 rules having the exactly same metadata match this now takes a long time.
Regards,
Jarno
> Thanks & Regards,
> Alok
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jarno Rajahalme [mailto:ja...@ovn.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12,
again with releases 2.4 and 2.5.
Jarno
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 5:15 PM, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>
> I’m looking into this,
>
> Jarno
>
>> On Apr 11, 2016, at 3:41 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>
>> Jarno, it seems likely that this has something to do
I’m looking into this,
Jarno
> On Apr 11, 2016, at 3:41 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> Jarno, it seems likely that this has something to do with the
> transactional classifier implementation. Do you think so? Do you have
> any idea why deletions would be so slow?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ben.
>
> On Mo
> On Mar 20, 2016, at 5:21 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 09:45:08AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>> OpenFlow 1.5 spec says: “The group type need not be specified for the delete
>> request.”
>
> Thanks Jarno. What I am wondering at this point i
OpenFlow 1.5 spec says: “The group type need not be specified for the delete
request.”
Jarno
> On Mar 17, 2016, at 7:40 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 05:48:23PM +, Shuva Jyoti Kar wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am trying deletion of an indirect group on ovs2.5 . Now when
> On Feb 10, 2016, at 1:27 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> I talked to Jarno about this.
>
> We think that implementing PacketOut as part of a bundle is going to be
> a considerable amount of work. Because bundles are atomic, it would be
> necessary to buffer all of the side effects (packet-ins to co
> On Oct 29, 2015, at 9:33 AM, Gray, Mark D wrote:
>
>>> On Oct 29, 2015, at 4:14 AM, Gray, Mark D wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Was this patch ever upstreamed? It doesn't seem to be in the code base?
>>>
>>> http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2014-August/043913.html
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>
>>
> On Oct 29, 2015, at 4:14 AM, Gray, Mark D wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Was this patch ever upstreamed? It doesn't seem to be in the code base?
>
> http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/dev/2014-August/043913.html
>
> Mark
>
No, it would require rebasing. No immediate plans, but I could work on it
somet
> On Oct 12, 2015, at 11:20 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 01:48:21PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 30, 2015, at 1:54 AM, Daniele Venturino
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I tried the commands you listed but I was not
> <0001-ofproto-dpif-Add-check-in-rstp_run.patch>
>
>> Il giorno 30/set/2015, alle ore 10:12, Daniel Swahn
>> ha scritto:
>>
>> I tested with the patch but unfortunately the same crash occurs.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jarno Raj
om
> it, but can you give it a try since I can’t reproduce this?
>
> Daniele
>
> <0001-ofproto-dpif-Add-check-in-rstp_run.patch>
>
Yes, NULLing the aux’es does not help without checking for NULL :-)
Acked-by: Jarno Rajahalme
>> Il giorno 30/set/2015, alle ore 1
have been solved! I'm using yours and Jarno's patch and
> now the system boots up without crashes. Thanks!
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniele Venturino [mailto:venturino.dani...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Daniele Venturino
> Sent: 2015-09-30 10:54
> To:
> On Sep 28, 2015, at 9:13 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 11:31:31AM +, Daniel Swahn wrote:
>> (gdb) frame 0
>> #0 0x004291ca in rstp_run (ofproto=,
>> ofproto=) at ofproto/ofproto-dpif.c:2278
>> 2278bundle_move(((struct ofport_dpif
>> *)rstp_get_
On Feb 18, 2015, at 8:06 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 02:49:12PM +0530, Chethan C R wrote:
>> I am currently investigating on the implementation of OF 1.4 bundles.
>>
>> Per Spec, the implementation should be able to support at least port mod
>> and flow mod in any order.
>>
On Dec 3, 2014, at 1:59 PM, Mijo Safradin wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2014, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2014, at 11:14 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:30:08PM +0100, Mijo Safradin wrote:
>>>>
>
On Dec 3, 2014, at 10:32 AM, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>
> On Dec 2, 2014, at 11:14 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 01:30:08PM +0100, Mijo Safradin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> It fails on master and on older git versions as well. Eve
gt; 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 fir
21 matches
Mail list logo
