Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bug 1823560: backport fixes to support upstream->downstream merges #590

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

dcbw
Copy link
Contributor

@dcbw dcbw commented Apr 13, 2020

4.3 version of #589

Backports of #466, #467, and #572 . These are needed to make nbctl daemon mode work while at the same time being able to check local OVS database to figure out if SCTP is supported by OVN.

@trozet @knobunc @fepan @openshift/networking

pecameron and others added 2 commits April 13, 2020 17:07
Completes the switch from ovn2.11 to ovn2.12 by removing support for the
now obsolete ovn2.11

SDN-643
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SDN-643

Signed-off-by: Phil Cameron <pcameron@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit f479a53)
For OVN NB DB interaction with the ovn-nbctl command, we use ovn-nbctl
daemon mode, where we do not need to use SSL arguments to directly
interact iwth the nbctl socket in the pod. However, SSL arguments are
needed for non-nbctl commands like ovsdb client. This patch adds those
arguments.

In addition, the nbctl-daemon-mode argument was missing as well. This
argument indicates to ovn-kubernetes that it needs to use nbctl daemon
mode. Even though we were previously not setting this, we were exporting
the proper bash env var to allow the process to automatically use daemon
mode. However, we should pass the correct arguments to be consistent.
Due to an OVN bug, we need to temporarily symlink the ovn-nbctl control
socket to /var/run/ovn as it is accidentally placed in
/var/run/openvswitch today.

Signed-off-by: Tim Rozet <trozet@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit 3a85ce8)
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Apr 13, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@dcbw: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1823560, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1823557 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is MODIFIED instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

Bug 1823560: backport fixes to support upstream->downstream merges

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dcbw

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Apr 13, 2020
@dcbw
Copy link
Contributor Author

dcbw commented Apr 14, 2020

/test e2e-aws-ovn

@dcbw
Copy link
Contributor Author

dcbw commented Apr 14, 2020

/test e2e-gcp-ovn

@dcbw
Copy link
Contributor Author

dcbw commented Apr 17, 2020

No longer required for 4.3

@dcbw dcbw closed this Apr 17, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants