[ovs-dev] [PATCH 2/3] ovn-controller.c: Move the position of handling OVN-SB related settings.

Mark Michelson mmichels at redhat.com
Wed Jan 22 18:41:46 UTC 2020


On 1/22/20 11:19 AM, Han Zhou wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 2:34 PM Han Zhou <hzhou at ovn.org 
> <mailto:hzhou at ovn.org>> wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 1:24 PM Mark Michelson <mmichels at redhat.com 
> <mailto:mmichels at redhat.com>> wrote:
>  > >
>  > > The commit message doesn't make much sense to me. The external-ids are
>  > > set outside of ovn-controller, so the concept of them being handled in
>  > > "the same iteration" or "the next one" only works if ovn-controller is
>  > > setting them at some point in the loop.
>  > >
>  > Maybe the commit message is not clear enough. Let me explain with 
> more details.
>  > In each iteration, the OVS IDL's data is updated AFTER the line:
>  >     struct ovsdb_idl_txn *ovs_idl_txn = 
> ovsdb_idl_loop_run(&ovs_idl_loop);
>  >
>  > Without this patch, it (the lines that are moved) applies the 
> settings before reading the new settings. So if a change is made to 
> external-ids, e.g. ovn-remote-db, the loop will be waked up because of 
> the OVSDB RPC messages, but it won't apply any of the new settings. The 
> new settings will be applied only if there is another event coming to 
> wake the loop, e.g. probe interval timeout. In my testing I saw the 
> change took effect after 5 seconds when probe interval timed out. If 
> probe was disabled, it would never got applied unless a new change is 
> made. I suspect the problem reported here [0] may due to the same reason.
>  >
>  > [0] 
> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/2020-January/049695.html
>  >
>  > > Couldn't this have a negative effect on the first iteration of the 
> loop?
>  > > If we don't set SSL parameters or the sb remote first, then we will 
> have
>  > > errors when attempting to connect to the southbound database.
>  > >
>  >
>  > At the first iteration, it just make sure the OVS IDL data is 
> refreshed before setting the SSL parameters. We are still setting the 
> parameters. The patch doesn't skip anything.
>  >
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> Could you confirm if my response solves your concern?

Yes, your explanation cleared up my confusion.

Acked-by: Mark Michelson <mmichels at redhat.com>
> 
> Thanks,
> Han



More information about the dev mailing list