On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 02:17:07PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 04:50:03PM +0800, solomon wrote: > > Ilya Maximets wrote: > > >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:41:05AM +0800, solomon wrote: > > >>> Ben Pfaff wrote: > > >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 08:16:18PM +0800, Li Wei wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> After inserting/removing a bucket, we don't update the bucket counter. > > >>>>> When we call ovs-ofctl dump-group-stats br-int, a panic happened. > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks for the patch! It looks correct to me. Thank you for adding a > > >>>> test, too. > > >>>> > > >>>> I took a closer look and I saw that 'n_buckets' is not very useful, > > >>>> because it is only used in cases where the code is already > > >>>> O(n_buckets). I think that we can just remove it. Then it cannot get > > >>>> out-of-sync. What do you think of this variation of your patch? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> ovs_list_size() will traversing the list to get the total length. > > >>> > > >>> In our custom scheduling algorithms (eg wrr, least-connection), > > >>> we need to know the total number of buckets before traversing the > > >>> bucket list to hit target bucket. > > >>> so, it is traversed twice. > > >>> > > >>> If the number of buckets reaches 100+, there are tens of thousands of > > >>> groups, don't this modification affect performance? > > >>> > > >>> I hope to keep n_buckets in struct ofgroup. > > >> > > >> OK. > > >> > > >> I applied the original to master and backported as far as branch-2.6. > > > > > > This patch broke the testsuite on branches 2.6 to 2.10. > > > > The new testcase in this patch insert new bucket using insert-buckets > > command. > > But there is a bug in inserting bucket with weight fixed in commit > > 0b4caa2eba22a516a312e7b404107eaebe618ee1 > > （ofp-group: support to insert bucket with weight value for select type） > > > > Also need to backport commit 0b4caa2eba to branch2.6~2.10. > > Thanks, I have made preliminary backports to the relevant branches > and am running travisci to see if the tests pass. > > https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511479533
The check above, of the backport to branch-2.10, succeeded so I have pushed the backport to the ovs tree. > https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511482871 > https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511482977 > https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511482911 > https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511482945 The above backports to branches 2.6 to 2.9 were incomplete. I have made a second attempt. Travis is checking over that: https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511479533 https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511897524 https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511897703 https://travis-ci.org/horms2/ovs/builds/511897927 _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
