[ovs-dev] [PATCH ovn] ovs: Bump submodule version to latest ovsdb-cs changes.

Mark Michelson mmichels at redhat.com
Fri Mar 12 01:07:58 UTC 2021


Given the documentation clarification from Ilya's other patch:

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

See below for more from me.

On 3/11/21 5:58 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 3/11/21 11:29 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>>>>>>> Few bugfixes was accepted recently to OVS for ovsdb-cs code
>>>>>>> that are required for OVN build.
>>>> I actually thought that the submodule was a recommended OVS version as
>>>> well as what OVN builds against.  If that's not so, then yes we should
>>>> clarify somehow.
>>>
>>> It's a recommended OVS version to build with.  I'd not recommend using
>>> it to actually build ovs-vswitchd or ovsdb-server, because it will
>>> mean that you're running non-released version of OVS that is always
>>> behind even the master branch.
>>
>> Hmm, OK.
>>
>> I would have guessed that for release branches we would point this to a
>> release tag of OVS and that for the master branche we would point this
>> to a commit in the master branch of OVS.
> 
> This might be a good approach, but there is one major issue:
> OVN has 2x as many releases as OVS.  This means that every
> second OVN release will have to point to some commit on OVS
> master anyway if we want some new features there.
> 
> I'd say that eventually OVN should become less feature hungry
> or less dependent from OVS changes.  Then we should consider
> to use only stable released OVS as a build dependency and
> actually wait for the next major OVS release if some new features
> required from it.  But right now we can't afford that.

I'd say the vast majority of the time these days, the OVS changes OVN 
depends on are specifically OVSDB changes. One possible idea is to 
separate OVSDB from OVS and semantically version the OVSDB API. Then OVS 
and OVN would be consumers of the same common project.

You'd still have the potential for needing to update the OVS submodule 
to some non-released version. But hopefully the frequency of such 
updates would be reduced. And if the frequency is reduced enough, it 
probably wouldn't be outside the realm of reason to request backports of 
bug fixes and point-releases of OVS whenever OVN requires a submodule 
update.

> 
>>
>> I see that I didn't conceptualize this correctly.
>>
>>> Looking at the OVN documentation from this perspective I see that it
>>> very loose in operation with word "use".  I think it should mean "build with",
>>> but it's definitely not obvious.
>>>
>>> I've sent a patch to clarify the documentation:
>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ovn/patch/20210311203819.2526788-1-i.maximets@ovn.org/
>>
>> Thanks, I'll have a look.
>>
> 
> 
> 



More information about the dev mailing list