[ovs-dev] [PATCH ovn v2] northd: Support flow offloading for logical switches with no ACLs.
Dumitru Ceara
dceara at redhat.com
Mon May 10 15:39:30 UTC 2021
On 5/7/21 4:42 PM, numans at ovn.org wrote:
> From: Numan Siddique <numans at ovn.org>
>
> Some smart NICs can't offload datapath flows matching on conntrack
> fields. If a deployment desires to make use of such smart NICs
> then it cannot configure ACLs on the logical switches. If suppose
> a logical switch S1 has no ACLs configured and a logical switch S2
> has ACLs configured, then the CMS would expect the datapath flows
> belonging to S1 logical ports are offloaded since it has no ACLs.
> But this is not working as expected (even if S1 and S2 are
> not connected via a logical router).
>
> ovn-northd generates the below logical flows in ls_in_acl_hint
> and ls_in_acl stages for S1
>
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;)
>
> And the below for S2
>
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=7 , match=(ct.new && !ct.est), action=(reg0[7] = 1; reg0[9] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=6 , match=(!ct.new && ct.est && !ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 1), action=(reg0[7] = 1; reg0[9] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=5 , match=(!ct.trk), action=(reg0[8] = 1; reg0[9] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=4 , match=(!ct.new && ct.est && !ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(reg0[8] = 1; reg0[10] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=3 , match=(!ct.est), action=(reg0[9] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=2 , match=(ct.est && ct_label.blocked == 1), action=(reg0[9] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=1 , match=(ct.est && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(reg0[10] = 1; next;)
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(!ct.est && ct.rel && !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(ct.est && !ct.rel && !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(ct.inv || (ct.est && ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 1)), action=(drop;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(nd || nd_ra || nd_rs || mldv1 || mldv2), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=34000, match=(eth.dst == $svc_monitor_mac), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=1 , match=(ip && (!ct.est || (ct.est && ct_label.blocked == 1))), action=(reg0[1] = 1; next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;)
>
> Because there are higher priority flows in 'ls_in_acl_hint' and
> 'ls_in_acl' with the match on conntrack fields,
> ovs-vswitchd will generate a datapath flow with the match on ct_state fields as -
> 'ct_state(-new-est-rel-rpl-inv-trk)' for the packet from S1, even though
> the S1 pipeline doesn't have logical flows which match on conntrack
> fields. [1] has more information.
>
> Modifying the below flows if a logical switch has no ACLs solves this
> problem.
>
> table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=65535 , match=(1), action=(next;)
> table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535 , match=(1), action=(next;)
>
> With the above flows with higher priority, ovs-vswitchd will not
> consider other flows in the same table during translation.
>
> This patch addresses this issue by using higher prioriy flows (for both
> ls_in_acl* and ls_out_acl* stages).
>
> [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955191#c8
>
> Signed-off-by: Numan Siddique <numans at ovn.org>
> ---
Hi Numan,
A couple of tests are failing after rebase:
789: ovn -- ct.inv usage -- ovn-northd -- dp-groups=yes FAILED
(ovn-northd.at:3147)
790: ovn -- ct.inv usage -- ovn-northd FAILED
(ovn-northd.at:3147)
> v1 -> v2
> ----
> * Rebased to resolve conflicts.
> * Addressed review comment from Dumitru. Combined ls_has_stateful_acl()
> and ls_has_acl() into one single function - od_ls_update_acls_flags().
Nit: There's no other function in ovn_northd that's prefixed with
od_ls_.*(). Maybe it makes sense to rename this to ls_get_acl_flags()
to be inline with ls_has_lb_vip()?
Regards,
Dumitru
More information about the dev
mailing list