[ovs-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] dpif-netdev: split out generic lookup function

[Eelco Chaudron]

On 25 Mar 2019, at 17:30, Van Haaren, Harry wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ilya Maximets [mailto:i.maximets at samsung.com]
>> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 1:19 PM
>> To: Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>; Eelco Chaudron
>> <echaudro at redhat.com>
>> Cc: ovs-dev at openvswitch.org
>> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] dpif-netdev: split out generic 
>> lookup
>> function
>>
>> On 22.03.2019 16:08, Van Haaren, Harry wrote:
>>> Hey Eelco,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>
> <snip>
>
>>> I'll work on addressing your comments early next week - thanks 
>>> again! -H
>>
>> Hi Harry,
>>
>> I didn't look at this series closely yet. But if you're going to 
>> prepare new
>> version, it'll be good to fix checkpatch issues reported by 0-day 
>> robot too:
>>
>>   https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2019-February/356615.html
>>   https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-dev/2019-February/356616.html
>>
>> BTW, commented out counters looks suspicious.
>>
>> Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
>
> Thanks Ilya, fixing checkpatch issues now, no problems.
>
> Correct the lookups_match counter isn't implemented yet - will add it 
> in v6 implementation.
>
> The name of the variable is a bit misleading - it really counts the 
> number of subtables searched for a match, per packet that it found a 
> hit for.
>
> Eg: a packet that matched the 3rd subtable searched, will += counter 
> by 3.
>
> So really, it counts "subtable-effort per packet match". Does this 
> align with you understanding of it?
>
> Thanks, -Harry

Ran the PVP tests over the weekend and the results look good. The Zero 
loss ones have quite some deviation, so I would ignore them.
Here is a link to the results:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/e/2PACX-1vSrHgy18vTWFWk_SCF4vggtr1qpimMUkhZuHCSQtmEQi77yCjPrxlAr4hvNvtuIO3Vzzsy31bls2_wP/pubhtml?skip_itp2_check=true#

Will continue the review on v6.