[ovs-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] datapath: add layer 3 flow/port support

Pravin Shelar pshelar at nicira.com
Wed Nov 12 03:03:21 UTC 2014


On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Jesse Gross <jesse at nicira.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Pravin Shelar <pshelar at nicira.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Lori Jakab <lojakab at cisco.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/7/14 8:50 AM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Lori Jakab <lojakab at cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/6/14 4:06 AM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you tried running GSO traffic over lisp using OVS compat GSO code
>>>>>>>> and upstream GSO code?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I haven't and I'm not sure what's the right way to do that.  I do my
>>>>>>> testing
>>>>>>> between to VMs.  I see with ethtool that GSO is enabled on the virtual
>>>>>>> NICs
>>>>>>> in the VMs, and on the br0 interface after the switch is created.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To test that I can enable/disable GSO I download a 30MB file over HTTP
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> look in Wireshark for packets satisfying "ip.len > 1500".  With TSO
>>>>>>> enabled,
>>>>>>> I do get such packets.  Not with GSO though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you point me to the right way to test this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> netperf test will to the trick, But you need to test with different
>>>>>> kernel versions.
>>>>>> - kernel < 3.10 where ovs configure could not find symbol
>>>>>> "gre_handle_offloads"
>>>>>> - kernel 3.17 which has all the offload used by OVS.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have one VM with Fedora 18 and kernel 3.7.2-201.fc18.x86_64, and the
>>>>> other
>>>>> with Fedora 19 and kernel 3.14.19-100.fc19.x86_64.  I tried netperf in
>>>>> both
>>>>> directions.  In both cases the OVS + LISP performance vs. direct link
>>>>> performace was one order of magnitude worse.  Is that to be expected?  Is
>>>>> this a good enough test for GSO traffic?  If yes, I will send out v7.
>>>>>
>>>> Can you give me numbers the you are seeing? One way to test GSO is to
>>>> look for any dropped packet at source, tcpdump can help with that. You
>>>> also need to set physical MTU large enough for encapsulated packet.
>>>
>>>
>>> I found packet loss unrelated to GSO, I need to add layer 3 support to
>>> ovs_packet_cmd_execute() as well.  I'll get back to you after I finish this
>>> and I'm able to do the tests.
>>>
>>
>> ok.
>>
>> What are you plans regarding L3 GRE support? We need it to upstream this work.
>
> I assume that you mean because LISP isn't upstream yet? I think we
> need to try to push it again so that we can resolve the differences
> from upstream.
>
Yes, I was referring to LISP upstreaming. I am not sure about plans.
Are we still trying to add support for LISP network device?

> However, I just talked to Thomas Morin and he plans to work on L3 GRE
> again on top of these patches soon.
ok.



More information about the dev mailing list