[ovs-discuss] 答复: Add arp flow error

Yinpeijun yinpeijun at huawei.com
Tue Aug 30 06:14:50 UTC 2016


Hi Jarno, 
did you have time checking this issue? This problem has puzzled us for a while.
If you have some ideas, pls let us know. Thanks!

>Jarno, do you have time to take a look at this sometime?  I don't understand how it would happen, but if it does then it probably has something to do with synchronization and you know how OVS userspace does that really well.                                                                                                                                                                                     
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
>Thanks,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
>Ben.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
>On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 12:13:03PM +0000, Yinpeijun wrote:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> Hi ALL,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> 	Here is the test scene which we used to generate the error.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> 	1. add a bridge like "ovs-vsctl add-br br-int"                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
>>     2. add a port to br-int "ovs-vsctl add-port br-int eth1"                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
>> 	3. delete the default normal flow of it, "ovs-vsctl del-flows br-int"                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
>> 	4. add arp reply flow, " ovs-ofctl add-flow br-int "hard_timeout=0,idle_timeout=0,priority=11115,nw_dst=193.168.101.11,arp,table=22,actions=move:NXM_OF_ETH_SRC[]->NXM_OF_ETH_DST[],mod_dl_src:00:16:3e:1d:33:b1,load:0x2->NXM_OF_ARP_OP[], move:NXM_NX_ARP_SHA[]->NXM_NX_ARP_THA[],move:NXM_OF_ARP_SPA[]->NXM_OF_ARP_TPA[],load:0x00163e1d33b1->NXM_NX_ARP_SHA[],load:0xc1a8650b->NXM_OF_ARP_SPA[],in_port""
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> 	If we use netperf/iperf send packets from other server physical nic to this eth1 and repeat to do step 4, we will get the follow error with a high probability.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> 	OFPT_ERROR (xid=0x4): OFPFMFC_BAD_COMMAND OFPT_FLOW_MOD (xid=0x4):                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
>> 	(***truncated to 64 bytes from 240***)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
>> 	00000000 01 0e 00 f0 00 00 00 04-00 30 20 ef 00 00 00 00 |.........0 .....|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
>> 	00000010 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00-00 00 00 00 00 00 08 06 |................|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
>> 	00000020 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00-c1 a8 69 0a 00 00 00 00 |..........i.....|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
>> 	00000030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00-16 00 00 00 00 00 2b 6b                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
>> |..............+k|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> 	We find that a revalidate thread may affects the step4. It may modify the connmgr's ofputil_protocol.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
>> 	                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
>> 	This should be a bug , Could someone confirm this? Or any good way to solve the problem?                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
>> 	Hope to hear feedback.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
>>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
>> 	Thanks,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
>> 	Ray                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          


More information about the discuss mailing list