[ovs-discuss] tc ingress qdisc of tapB disappeared when del-port tapA from bridge

ychen ychen103103 at 163.com
Thu Aug 20 02:59:36 UTC 2015

1. maybe I am not clearly describe this question.
   what I am want to find out is why VALID_POLICING is still set when kbits_rate equals to 0?
  in openvsiwthc document, it says:

 ingress_policing_rate: integer, at least 0
     Maximum rate for data received on this interface, in kbps. Data received faster than this rate is
     dropped. Set to 0 (the default) to disable policing.

2. ok, for this RTM_NEWLILNK, i wil find it by myself. 
    anyway, thanks!

At 2015-08-20 06:54:10, "Ben Pfaff" <blp at nicira.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 09:36:51PM +0800, ychen wrote:
>> There are still something puzzled me, can you do some help?
>> 1. what's the meaning of the flag VALID_POLICING?
>>    I don't see any meaning of the flag VALID_POLICING in function netdev_linux_set_policing().
>>    you see, whether the parameter "kbits_rate"equals to 0, the clause netdev->cache_valid |= VALID_POLICING; will be executed only if the conditions matches error !=0 
>I don't think that's true.  The full condition checks for error == 0 or
>error == ENODEV:
>    if (!error || error == ENODEV) {
>        netdev->netdev_policing_error = error;
>        netdev->cache_valid |= VALID_POLICING;
>    }
>>    another strange phenomenon is that, when i set breakpoint on function netdev_linux_set_policing, I found that netdev->cache_valid equals to 0x73 which means VALID_POLICING has set before this function
>>    but I can't find anywhere to set this flag except in function netdev_linux_set_policing. why?
>I also only see netdev_linux_set_policing() setting this flag.
>> 2. which event triggered message RTM_NEWLINK?
>>    I found that when use command "add-port br0  tap111", first function netdev_linux_set_policing() will be called, then netdev_linux_update() with message RTM_NEWLINK
>>    and this message will lead to netdev->cache_valid to clear the flag VALID_POLICING.
>>    my question is, the port tap111 is a system port, I have created it in kernel before add it to ovs bridge.
>>    and I didn't to anything like up the port or change the port's namespace or change mtu/mac etc, but why RTM_NEWLINK is trigerred?
>I'm not an expert on that aspect of Linux.  You can read the kernel
>source code as easily as I can, I guess.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/attachments/20150820/b4a03039/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list