[ovs-dev] [PATCH 0/6] Bond port megaflow using recirculation

Jesse Gross jesse at nicira.com
Wed Feb 12 01:22:55 UTC 2014


On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Ben Pfaff <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 05:00:33PM -0800, Andy Zhou wrote:
>> Bonding metaflow does not need it, but one can envision that
>> controller may want to manage (some subset of) recirc_ids in the
>> future.  In those cases, table 254 is a good candidate.
>
> Sure.  Or one could give a subset of recirc ids to the controller, I
> guess, by making table 254 resubmit those to some more ordinary table.

I'm not sure that we want a controller to know about recirculation. I
would consider it to be an implementation detail - the controller
expresses its needs through the use of resubmit or multiple tables and
some of those needs can be satisfied entirely in userspace and some
can't be. However, fundamentally userspace vs. kernel is not exposed
to the controller.



More information about the dev mailing list