Thanks Rohith
MPLSoGRE was not among my top 10 guesses :-); I’ll take a look. Darrell On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:36 AM, Rohith Basavaraja < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Darell, > > > > In my simple setup I have interface in namespace ns1 with IP 192.168.10.10 > and in connected to bridge br-in1 (Just mentioning relevant config) > > And br-in1 I have following flows. > > > > lab@ubuntu-vm:/var/log/openvswitch$ sudo ovs-ofctl -OOpenFlow13 > dump-flows br-in1 > > cookie=0x0, duration=83.662s, table=0, n_packets=75, n_bytes=7294, > in_port="br-in1-ns1" actions=push_mpls:0x8847,set_ > field:666->mpls_label,output:gre1 > > cookie=0x0, duration=83.644s, table=0, n_packets=75, n_bytes=7594, > mpls,in_port=gre1,mpls_label=999 actions=pop_mpls:0x0800,set_ > field:26:ed:b2:5d:50:d7->eth_dst,output:"br-in1-ns1" > > > > When I ping the remote interface things works fine > > > > lab@ubuntu-vm:~$ sudo ip netns exec ns2 ping -W 1 192.168.10.10 > > PING 192.168.10.10 (192.168.10.10) 56(84) bytes of data. > > 64 bytes from 192.168.10.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.62 ms > > 64 bytes from 192.168.10.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.723 ms > > > > and the corresponding dpctl entries are are as follows > > > > lab@ubuntu-vm:~/testsuites$ sudo ovs-appctl dpif/dump-flows br-in1 > > > > tunnel(src=10.0.0.2,dst=10.0.0.1,flags(-df-csum)),recirc_ > id(0),in_port(7),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth(dst=26:ed:b2: > 5d:50:d7),eth_type(0x8847),mpls(label=999/0xfffff,tc=0/0,ttl=64/0x0,bos=1/1), > packets:33, bytes:3366, used:0.978s, actions:pop_mpls(eth_type=0x800),5 > > > > recirc_id(0),in_port(5),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_ > type(0x0800),ipv4(tos=0/0xfc,ttl=64,frag=no), packets:33, bytes:3234, > used:0.978s, actions:push_mpls(label=666,tc=0,ttl=64,bos=1,eth_type= > 0x8847),clone(tnl_push(tnl_port(7),header(size=38,type=3, > eth(dst=86:67:03:ad:e7:e9,src=7a:9f:1f:ce:fc:b6,dl_type= > 0x0800),ipv4(src=10.0.0.1,dst=10.0.0.2,proto=47,tos=0,ttl= > 64,frag=0x4000),gre((flags=0x0,proto=0x6558))),out_port(2)),8) > > > > > > Then Moments I start transmitting the fragmented packet (by increasing the > packet size) I hit the assert mentioned in the problem. > > > > sudo ip netns exec ns2 ping -s 5000 -W 1 192.168.10.10 ç= Note packet > size is increased to force fragmentation at the sender. > > > > 2018-05-14T18:35:44.571Z|00114|util|EMER|lib/odp-util.c:7008: assertion > flow->nw_proto == base_flow->nw_proto && flow->nw_frag == > base_flow->nw_frag failed in commit_set_ipv4_action() > > 2018-05-14T18:35:44.835Z|00002|daemon_unix(monitor)|ERR|1 crashes: pid > 19200 died, killed (Aborted), core dumped, restarting > > > > Thanks > > Rohith > > > > *From: *Darrell Ball <[email protected]> > *Date: *Friday, 11 May 2018 at 10:33 PM > *To: *Rohith Basavaraja <[email protected]> > *Cc: *Darrell Ball <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]> > *Subject: *Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH] Avoid crash in OvS while transmitting > fragmented packets over tunnel. > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:35 PM, Rohith Basavaraja < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Darell, > > I reproduce the issue by making VM to transmit fragmented packets and in > OvS if we have corresponding rule > to transmit the received fragmented packet (from VM) over tunnel then I > always hit the crash. > > > > Thanks Rohith > > > > Unfortunately, I don't hit the assert. > > I even tried again with the latest master with this change removed. > > I used Geneve for the last test, but I am pretty sure I used Vxlan as well > for this kind of test b4, as I use it often as well. > > > > Would you mind describing your test in more detail (packets and flows)? > > > > Thanks Darrell > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > Rohith > > > On 11/05/18, 2:16 AM, "Darrell Ball" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Rohith > I see this patch was applied, but I have one question inline. > > > On 4/20/18, 1:48 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of > Rohith Basavaraja" <[email protected] on behalf of > [email protected]> wrote: > > Currently when fragmented packets are to be transmitted in to > tunnel, > base_flow->nw_frag which was initially non-zero at reception is not > reset to zero when the base_flow and flow are rewritten > as part of the emulated tnl_push action in the ofproto-dpif-xlate > module. > > Because of this when fragmented packets are transmitted out of > tunnel, > we hit crash caused by the following assert. > > lib/odp-util.c:5654: assertion flow->nw_proto == > base_flow->nw_proto && > flow->nw_frag == base_flow->nw_frag failed in > commit_set_ipv4_action() > > Can you describe how you hit this assertion? > I have some testing in and around this code, but have not hit this > yet, so I was curious? > > With the following change propagate_tunnel_data_to_flow__ > is modified to reset *nw_frag* to zero. > > > Also, that currently we don't > fragment tunnelled packets, we should reset *nw_frag* to zero in > propagate_tunnel_data_to_flow__. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Scheurich <[email protected]> > From: Rohith Basavaraja <[email protected]> > CC: Jan Scheurich <[email protected]> > > --- > ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c > b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c > index 94e3ddb..e9ed037 100644 > --- a/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c > +++ b/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c > @@ -3310,6 +3310,7 @@ propagate_tunnel_data_to_flow__(struct flow > *dst_flow, > dst_flow->ipv6_dst = src_flow->tunnel.ipv6_dst; > dst_flow->ipv6_src = src_flow->tunnel.ipv6_src; > > + dst_flow->nw_frag = 0; /* Tunnel packets are unfragmented. */ > > > dst_flow->nw_tos = src_flow->tunnel.ip_tos; > dst_flow->nw_ttl = src_flow->tunnel.ip_ttl; > dst_flow->tp_dst = src_flow->tunnel.tp_dst; > -- > 1.9.1 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mail. > openvswitch.org_mailman_listinfo_ovs-2Ddev&d=DwICAg&c= > uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ&r=BVhFA09CGX7JQ5Ih-uZnsw&m= > 6ZMZ7J9yNmX0ZQRMQyUfQ8fZrhemcMFiUqpnVD_jN9w&s=lYu98hfGnEvKr7YcK50fxDDY9- > d0mA3W0yYtpSeeIQo&e= > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev > > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
