[ovs-dev] [PATCH v2 RFC] ovs-lib: try to call exit before killing

[Ilya Maximets]

On 16.12.2015 15:21, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:31:03PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 16.12.2015 13:02, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:07:23PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>>> On 16.12.2015 11:27, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 09:58:56AM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.12.2015 09:53, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 09:50:56AM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
>>>>>>>> While killing OVS may not free all allocated resources.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Eample:
>>>>>>>> 	Socket for vhost-user port will stay in a system
>>>>>>>> 	after 'systemctl stop openvswitch' and opening
>>>>>>>> 	that port after restart will fail.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets at samsung.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> version 2:
>>>>>>>> 	* added '-T 1'
>>>>>>>> 	* '-t $1' --> '-t $rundir/$1.$pid.ctl'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you tested it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. On my setup it works.
>>>>>> Only reason why it put RFC to that patch:
>>>>>> Is all daemons have unixctl exit command? Or we can just let ovs-appctl to fail here
>>>>>> in that case?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that all of our current daemons do have an "exit" command, but
>>>>> it might be worth removing the "2" after EXIT.  The purpose of the
>>>>> delays in this chain is to wait a bit for a given signal to be processed
>>>>> through the operating system and the daemon, but EXIT should wait until
>>>>> the process has actually exited, or at least get very close to that.
>>>>> Maybe a short delay like .1 would be reasonable, to allow for a brief
>>>>> race window.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think so, because ovs-vswitchd replies on connection to ovs-appctl
>>>> immediately, but actual exiting performed while stopping execution in
>>>> main loop.
>>>
>>> Then that means that this patch will generally make it take about 4
>>> longer to stop OVS, since killing each daemon will sleep for 2 seconds.
>>
>> Ok. May be something like 'EXIT .1 .25 .65 1 1 TERM' will be better?
> 
> I'm more comfortable with that.

OK. New version posted.

Best regards, Ilya Maximets.