Open Stack

Yep. Some tests are making sure there are no packets lost. Some are making
sure that stuff starts working eventually.

On Aug 4, 2016 12:28, "Brian Haley" <brian.haley at hpe.com> wrote:

> On 08/04/2016 03:16 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
>
>> On 08/04/2016 12:04 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I wasn't thinking when I +2'ed that. There are two use cases for
>>> the pinger, one for ensuring continuous connectivity and one for
>>> eventual connectivity.
>>>
>>> I think the revert is okay for a quick fix, but we really need a new
>>> argument to the pinger for strictness to decide which behavior the test
>>> is looking for.
>>>
>>
>> What situation requires continuous connectivity?
>>
>
> Maybe the test names can answer that:
>
> test_assert_pings_during_br_int_setup_not_lost()
> _test_assert_pings_during_br_phys_setup_not_lost()
>
> In other cases we want the previous behavior - is that IP alive?  It's
> probably just best to put the old code back and make a new
> assert_async_ping() based on this code.
>
> -Brian
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160804/dd74be8d/attachment.html>