[ovs-dev] [PATCH v5] tunneling: Avoid recirculation on datapath by computing the recirculate actions at translate time.

Chandran, Sugesh sugesh.chandran at intel.com
Fri May 5 08:42:30 UTC 2017



Regards
_Sugesh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zoltán Balogh [mailto:zoltan.balogh at ericsson.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 9:19 AM
> To: Joe Stringer <joe at ovn.org>; Chandran, Sugesh
> <sugesh.chandran at intel.com>
> Cc: ovs dev <dev at openvswitch.org>; Ben Pfaff <blp at ovn.org>; William Tu
> <u9012063 at gmail.com>; Andy Zhou <azhou at ovn.org>
> Subject: RE: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v5] tunneling: Avoid recirculation on datapath
> by computing the recirculate actions at translate time.
> 
> Hi Joe,
> 
> > Thanks for taking a look. Andy and I have been throwing some thoughts
> > around about this, but I'm not sure we came to a concrete solution yet
> > either. My main thought is that I think that the 'flow' needs to be
> > modified in the similar way that the 'push_tnl' would work in the
> > datapath - updating the IP/UDP fields in a protocol-specific manner.
> > Then the shared code between patch ports and this tunneling
> > translation needs close attention to check everything is lined up
> > correctly, restored after output translation, etc.
> 
> I agree, the flow and base_flow need to be updated according the tunnel
> header before applying nested clone actions, then they should be restored.
[Sugesh] I agree to it, We need to consider the cases where more flows down 
the line after the clone. 
> 
> > Given that master is broken, it would be nice to restore it to a good
> > state. The quickest way to do so would be to revert this patch on
> > master. Then you could re-propose the patches to achieve this 'direct
> > translation of tunneling' logic. That said, if you expect this to be
> > fixed shortly then perhaps we could just wait for a fix. The main
> > worry I have is that the translation code tends to be pretty
> > elaborate/subtle so getting a solid fix in this area may take some
> > time (and my regular tester box has already been complaining at me for
> > a while now).
> >
> > What do you think? I'm happy to give you a bit more time if you think
> > that's the best approach.
> 
> I think it's ok if the patch is reverted, then a new patch with fix is going to be
> sent to the list. Since I'm a co-author, I would like to ask Sugesh as well.
> Sugesh what do you think?
[Sugesh] I am OK to revert the patch. I will work with Zoltan to send a new patch with 
proposed fix
Joe, William, 
I understand the concerns and will come up with a fix to take care of all of them.

> 
> Best regards,
> Zoltan



More information about the dev mailing list