Hi Pravin,

I have seen the below crash.

[<ffffffff80864cd4>] show_stack+0x6c/0xf8


[<ffffffff80ad1628>] do_raw_spin_lock+0x168/0x170


[<ffffffff80bf7b1c>] dev_queue_xmit+0x43c/0x470


[<ffffffff80c32c08>] ip_finish_output+0x250/0x490


[<ffffffffc0115664>] rpl_iptunnel_xmit+0x134/0x218 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffffc0120f28>] rpl_vxlan_xmit+0x430/0x538 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffffc00f9de0>] do_execute_actions+0x18f8/0x19e8 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffffc00fa2b0>] ovs_execute_actions+0x90/0x208 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffffc0101860>] ovs_dp_process_packet+0xb0/0x1a8 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffffc010c5d8>] ovs_vport_receive+0x78/0x130 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffffc010ce6c>] internal_dev_xmit+0x34/0x98 [openvswitch]


[<ffffffff80bf74d0>] dev_hard_start_xmit+0x2e8/0x4f8


[<ffffffff80c10e48>] sch_direct_xmit+0xf0/0x238


[<ffffffff80bf78b8>] dev_queue_xmit+0x1d8/0x470


[<ffffffff80c5ffe4>] arp_process+0x614/0x628


[<ffffffff80bf0cb0>] __netif_receive_skb_core+0x2e8/0x5d8


[<ffffffff80bf4770>] process_backlog+0xc0/0x1b0


[<ffffffff80bf501c>] net_rx_action+0x154/0x240


[<ffffffff8088d130>] __do_softirq+0x1d0/0x218


[<ffffffff8088d240>] do_softirq+0x68/0x70


[<ffffffff8088d3a0>] local_bh_enable+0xa8/0xb0


[<ffffffff80bf5c88>] netif_rx_ni+0x20/0x30



I have spent some time in investigation and found that crash is because of
spinlock recursion in dev_queue_xmit function.
The packet path traced is : netif_rx->arp->dev_queue_xmit(internal
port)->vxlan_xmit->dev_queue_xmit(internal port).

The macro (XMIT_RECURSION_LIMIT) is defined as 10. This limit wont prevent
the crash since the recursion is 2 only for my configuration.



On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Pravin Shelar <pshe...@ovn.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Neelakantam Gaddam
> <neelugad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Pravin,
> >
> > The below configuration is causing the spinlock recursion issue.
> >
> > I am able to see the issue with below configuration.
> >
> >
> >
> > ovs-vsctl add-br br0
> >
> > ovs-vsctl add-bond br0 bond0 p1p1 p1p2
> >
> > ovs-vsctl set port bond0 lacp=active bond_mode=balance-tcp
> >
> > ifconfig br0 100.0.0.1 up
> >
> > ovs-vsctl add-port br0 veth0
> >
> > ovs-vsctl add-port br0 vx0 -- set interface vx0 type=vxlan
> options:local_ip=100.0.0.1 options:remote_ip=100.0.0.2 option:key=flow
> >
> >
> >
> > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 "table=0, priority=1, cookie=100, tun_id=100,
> in_port=4, action=output:3"
> >
> > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 "table=0, priority=1, cookie=100, in_port=3,
> actions=set_field:100->tun_id output:4"
> >
> >
> >
> > The same bridge br0 is being used as the local interface for vxlan
> tunnel. Even though this configuration is invalid, we should not see the
> kernel crash.
> >
>
> I agree this should not cause crash.
> Can you post the crash or investigate why it is crashing I think such
> configuration would hit the networking stack recursion limit
> (XMIT_RECURSION_LIMIT) and then the packet would be dropped. I am not
> sure which spinlock recursion issue you are referring to.
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Pravin Shelar <pshe...@ovn.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:16 PM, Neelakantam Gaddam <
> neelugad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This patch fixes the kernel soft lockup issue with vxlan configuration
> >>> where the tunneled packet is sent on the same bridge where vxlan port
> is
> >>> attched to. It detects the loop in vxlan xmit functionb and drops if
> loop is
> >>> detected.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Neelakantam Gaddam <neelugad...@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  datapath/linux/compat/vxlan.c | 6 ++++--
> >>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/datapath/linux/compat/vxlan.c
> b/datapath/linux/compat/vxlan.c
> >>> index 287dad2..00562fa 100644
> >>> --- a/datapath/linux/compat/vxlan.c
> >>> +++ b/datapath/linux/compat/vxlan.c
> >>> @@ -1115,7 +1115,8 @@ static void vxlan_xmit_one(struct sk_buff *skb,
> struct net_device *dev,
> >>>                         goto tx_error;
> >>>                 }
> >>>
> >>> -               if (rt->dst.dev == dev) {
> >>> +               if ((rt->dst.dev == dev) ||
> >>> +                       (OVS_CB(skb)->input_vport->dev ==
> rt->dst.dev)) {
> >>
> >>
> >> I am not sure which case the  OVS_CB(skb)->input_vport->dev is not same
> as the dev when there is recursion. Can you explain how to reproduce it?
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks & Regards
> > Neelakantam Gaddam
>



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Neelakantam Gaddam
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to