[ovs-dev] [PATCH] ovs-ofctl: replace-flows and diff-flows support for multiple tables

[Romain Lenglet]

On December 8, 2015 at 12:18:29 PM, Jarno Rajahalme (jarno at ovn.org) wrote:

On Dec 8, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Shashank Shanbhag <shashank.shanbhag at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Jarno,

It looks great. We tested it internally to make sure.
I'm not in favor of exclusion lists, as it gets unwieldy if the number of tables of interest is pretty small (which is the case in our application). Thanks for this.

Acked-by: Shashank Shanbhag <shashank.shanbhag at gmail.com>



Thanks for the review and testing. However, I was left wondering if this is all you need, or you still need to restrict the set of tables the commands apply on? Currently, if the file has no flows for a specific table, replace-flows will empty that table.
We can work with this behavior for now. Passing the subset of tables to modify is an optimization which we can add on top later.

Thanks Jarno!

--Romain Lenglet



This change is in OVS master and branch-2.5.

  Jarno




---------------------------------------------------------
Shashank Shanbhag,
---------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Jarno Rajahalme <jarno at ovn.org> wrote:

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 8:50 AM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 04:22:22PM -0700, Shashank Shanbhag wrote:
>> Fix replace-flows and diff-flows to modify/diff flows in multiple tables.
>> Add a --tables(-T) option that allows the user to specify a comma-separated
>> list of table indexes to replace/diff.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shashank Shanbhag <shashank.shanbhag at gmail.com>
>> Acked-by: Romain Lenglet <romain.lenglet at oracle.com>
>
> Hi Jarno, I know that you were talking about a related bug fix a few
> days ago.  Can you see if this patch does this same thing?  I reviewed
> earlier versions of it.  I have not looked at this version yet.


Shashank,

I just rebased and sent a version 2 of the replace-flows fix to the list, as I felt it was a bit less invasive change. It does not have the tables command line parameter, but instead operates on all possible tables. I’m not sure if this helps you in your use case, or if you need to explicitly leave some tables un-touched by replace-flows. If this is the case, I suggest you review this patch (http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/546704/), and rebase your patch on top of it, but maybe have a command line option to exclude tables instead of listing what tables to process?

  Jarno