On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:46 PM Mark Michelson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 10/28/19 7:46 AM, Dumitru Ceara wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 11:07 PM Mark Michelson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> There is a maximum number of resubmits that can occur during packet
> >> processing. Deliberately creating a flow table that might cross this
> >> threshold is irresponsible.
> >>
> >> This commit causes the ofctrl code to track the maximum width and depth
> >> of conjunctions in the desired flow table. By multiplying them, we have
> >> a possible worst case for number of resubmits required. If this number
> >> exceeds a quarter of the maximum resubmits allowed, then we fall back to
> >> forcing crossproducts.
> >>
> >> The resulting flow table can end up being a mixture of conjunction and
> >> non-conjunction flows if the limit is exceeded.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Michelson <[email protected]>
> >
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > I've been testing the series on a setup with:
> > - 100 logical routers connected to a logical gateway router
> > - 100 logical switches (each connected to a logical router)
> > - 200 VIFs (2 per logical switch)
> > - 2 NAT rules on each router
> >
> > I bound all VIFs to OVS internal interfaces on the machine when
> > ovn-northd is running.
> >
> > If I start ovn-controller on the same node, without your series I see
> > ovn-controller taking more than 100s for a single flow computation
> > run.
> >
> > If I apply your series, the maximum duration of a flow computation run
> > in the same scenario drops to ~4s.
> >
> > This is really nice, however, I see some issues with flow removal (see
> > below).
>
> Thanks for the test, Dumitru.
>
> >
> >> ---
> >> controller/lflow.c | 11 +++++++++
> >> controller/ofctrl.c | 69
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> controller/ofctrl.h | 6 +++++
> >> include/ovn/expr.h | 2 ++
> >> lib/expr.c | 6 +++++
> >> 5 files changed, 94 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/controller/lflow.c b/controller/lflow.c
> >> index 34b7c36a6..318066465 100644
> >> --- a/controller/lflow.c
> >> +++ b/controller/lflow.c
> >> @@ -37,6 +37,13 @@
> >> VLOG_DEFINE_THIS_MODULE(lflow);
> >>
> >> COVERAGE_DEFINE(lflow_run);
> >> +
> >> +/* Limit maximum conjunctions to a quarter of the max
> >> + * resubmits. Unfortunatley, max resubmits is not publicly
> >> + * defined in a header file, so if max resubmits is changed
> >> + * from 4096, we have to make sure to update this as well
> >> + */
> >> +#define MAX_CONJUNCTIONS (4096 / 4)
> >>
> >> /* Symbol table. */
> >>
> >> @@ -602,6 +609,10 @@ consider_logical_flow(
> >> struct expr *prereqs;
> >> char *error;
> >>
> >> + uint32_t conj_worst_case;
> >> + conj_worst_case = flow_table->max_conj_width *
> >> flow_table->max_conj_depth;
> >> + expr_set_force_crossproduct(conj_worst_case >= MAX_CONJUNCTIONS);
> >> +
> >> error = ovnacts_parse_string(lflow->actions, &pp, &ovnacts,
> >> &prereqs);
> >> if (error) {
> >> static struct vlog_rate_limit rl = VLOG_RATE_LIMIT_INIT(1, 1);
> >> diff --git a/controller/ofctrl.c b/controller/ofctrl.c
> >> index afb0036f1..2b2fde3c9 100644
> >> --- a/controller/ofctrl.c
> >> +++ b/controller/ofctrl.c
> >> @@ -686,6 +686,64 @@ ofctrl_check_and_add_flow(struct
> >> ovn_desired_flow_table *flow_table,
> >> f->uuid_hindex_node.hash);
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static void
> >> +get_conjunction_dimensions(const struct ovn_flow *f, uint32_t
> >> *conj_width_p,
> >> + uint32_t *conj_depth_p)
> >> +{
> >> + struct ofpact *ofpact;
> >> + uint32_t conj_width = 0;
> >> + uint32_t conj_depth = 0;
> >> + OFPACT_FOR_EACH (ofpact, f->ofpacts, f->ofpacts_len) {
> >> + if (ofpact->type == OFPACT_CONJUNCTION) {
> >> + struct ofpact_conjunction *conj =
> >> ofpact_get_CONJUNCTION(ofpact);
> >> + if (conj->n_clauses > conj_depth) {
> >> + conj_depth = conj->n_clauses;
> >> + }
> >> + conj_width++;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + *conj_width_p = conj_width;
> >> + *conj_depth_p = conj_depth;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +static void
> >> +adjust_conjunction_count(struct ovn_desired_flow_table *desired_flows,
> >> + const struct ovn_flow *f, bool add)
> >> +{
> >> + uint32_t conj_width;
> >> + uint32_t conj_depth;
> >> +
> >> + get_conjunction_dimensions(f, &conj_width, &conj_depth);
> >> +
> >> + if (add) {
> >> + if (conj_width > desired_flows->max_conj_width) {
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_width = conj_width;
> >> + }
> >> + if (conj_depth > desired_flows->max_conj_depth) {
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_depth = conj_depth;
> >> + }
> >> + } else if (desired_flows->max_conj_width <= conj_width ||
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_depth <= conj_depth) {
> >> + /* Removing either the widest or deepest conjunction.
> >> + * Walk the table and recalculate maximums
> >> + */
> >> + struct ovn_flow *iter;
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_width = 0;
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_depth = 0;
> >> + HMAP_FOR_EACH (iter, match_hmap_node,
> >> + &desired_flows->match_flow_table) {
> >> + get_conjunction_dimensions(iter, &conj_width, &conj_depth);
> >> + if (conj_width > desired_flows->max_conj_width) {
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_width = conj_width;
> >> + }
> >> + if (conj_depth > desired_flows->max_conj_depth) {
> >> + desired_flows->max_conj_depth = conj_depth;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >
> > I think this is quite expensive because we change single flow removal
> > complexity from amortized O(1) to O(n).
> >
> > On the same setup as above if I continue testing and remove all
> > logical switches from the NB database it will trigger all flows to be
> > removed.
> >
> > In this scenario, with your series I see that two flow computation
> > runs take up to 17s.
> > On the other hand, if I do the deletion test without applying your
> > third patch, flow computation runs never take longer than 5s.
> >
> > I agree that it's good to limit the number of conjunctive flows but I
> > think we need to find a better way to track the max_conj_width/depth.
> > I guess we could track max flow conj_width/depth by storing ovn_flows
> > in a max-heap but that would change both flow add and remove
> > operations' complexities to O(log(n)).
> >
> > Or do you think we can have a different heuristic for disabling
> > conjunctive flows?
>
> Short version: we probably should just remove the limitation.
>
> Long version:
>
> My calculation method could stand to be improved.
>
> 1) The max_width * max_depth calculation assumes that the flow with the
> max_width correlates with the conjunction with max depth. This may not
> be the case.
> 2) The max_width * max_depth calculation only accounts for one possible
> conjunction's contribution to the resubmit count. If there are multiple
> conjunctive match flows, we don't account for that.
> 3) As you found, removing a flow requires an expensive traversal of the
> desired flows table. There could be some ways to mitigate this, but no
> matter what, the O(1) algorithm is toast.
> 4) I more-or-less guessed what the upper bound should be before setting
> force_crossproduct.
>
> So given all that, the proper things to do would be to either remove the
> limitation checks or come up with a different calculation.
>
> When it comes to calculations, we can either perform a running
> calculation (like I've done), or we can do a once-per-loop estimation
> based on configuration.
An alternative would be to do the current check periodically instead
of at every flow addition/deletion. On the long run that would keep
complexity to O(1) as we just walk the whole hashtable one more time
on a timer. The disadvantage is that we might need to reinstall the
existing conjunctive flows once we determine that the max_depth/width
was reached.
>
> The running calculation has the advantage of potentially being more
> accurate. It also allows for us to enable force_crossproduct partway
> through an ovn-controller loop. We can have some conjunctions, and some
> crossproducts in the resulting flow table. The problem is that this
> requires extra CPU time in order to keep track of the current
> conjunction count. The amount can be better than what I've put forth,
> but it's still going to be a downgrade from what it currently is.
>
> The one-time calculation might work by scanning the configured ACLs,
> Address_Sets, and Port_Groups to make an educated guess at the worst
> case for flow traversal. Unless we're willing to do some early parsing
> of ACLs, this likely would be only a rough estimate for the worst case.
> If we calculate that the number of potential conjunctions would exceed
> our upper bound, then we likely would need to completely disable
> conjunctions when calculating flows.
>
> The problem of the resubmit count is hypothetical. It's hard to know how
> likely it is for real systems to exceed the max resubmit count. It's
> also hard to estimate what the proper upper bound for conjunctions
> should be. I think that it would take an extreme network hitting the
> absolute worst cases to hit the resubmit limit. I think it's safe to
> continue without the limitations. If we ever get reports about max
> resubmit issues due to conjunctions, we can examine the individual
> scenarios and try to formulate some good heuristics.
This is also an option. And it's basically what OVN had before
conjunctions were disabled.
Thanks,
Dumitru
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dumitru
> >
>
>
>
> >> + }
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> /* Removes a bundles of flows from the flow table. */
> >> void
> >> ofctrl_remove_flows(struct ovn_desired_flow_table *flow_table,
> >> @@ -697,6 +755,7 @@ ofctrl_remove_flows(struct ovn_desired_flow_table
> >> *flow_table,
> >> &flow_table->uuid_flow_table) {
> >> if (uuid_equals(&f->sb_uuid, sb_uuid)) {
> >> ovn_flow_log(f, "ofctrl_remove_flow");
> >> + adjust_conjunction_count(flow_table, f, false);
> >> hmap_remove(&flow_table->match_flow_table,
> >> &f->match_hmap_node);
> >> hindex_remove(&flow_table->uuid_flow_table,
> >> &f->uuid_hindex_node);
> >> @@ -747,6 +806,12 @@ ofctrl_add_or_append_flow(struct
> >> ovn_desired_flow_table *desired_flows,
> >> existing->ofpacts = xmemdup(compound.data, compound.size);
> >> existing->ofpacts_len = compound.size;
> >>
> >> + /* It's a bit of a cheat that we only call
> >> adjust_conjunction_count in
> >> + * this function and not in ofctrl_add(). However, we know that
> >> + * conjunctions are only ever added with this function
> >> + */
> >> + adjust_conjunction_count(desired_flows, existing, true);
> >> +
> >> ovn_flow_destroy(f);
> >> } else {
> >> hmap_insert(&desired_flows->match_flow_table,
> >> &f->match_hmap_node,
> >> @@ -862,6 +927,8 @@ ovn_desired_flow_table_init(struct
> >> ovn_desired_flow_table *flow_table)
> >> {
> >> hmap_init(&flow_table->match_flow_table);
> >> hindex_init(&flow_table->uuid_flow_table);
> >> + flow_table->max_conj_width = 0;
> >> + flow_table->max_conj_depth = 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> void
> >> @@ -874,6 +941,8 @@ ovn_desired_flow_table_clear(struct
> >> ovn_desired_flow_table *flow_table)
> >> hindex_remove(&flow_table->uuid_flow_table,
> >> &f->uuid_hindex_node);
> >> ovn_flow_destroy(f);
> >> }
> >> + flow_table->max_conj_width = 0;
> >> + flow_table->max_conj_depth = 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> void
> >> diff --git a/controller/ofctrl.h b/controller/ofctrl.h
> >> index 21d2ce648..c295c04ed 100644
> >> --- a/controller/ofctrl.h
> >> +++ b/controller/ofctrl.h
> >> @@ -37,6 +37,12 @@ struct ovn_desired_flow_table {
> >>
> >> /* SB uuid index for the nodes in match_flow_table.*/
> >> struct hindex uuid_flow_table;
> >> +
> >> + /* Highest known number of conjunction() actions in a single flow */
> >> + uint32_t max_conj_width;
> >> +
> >> + /* Largest number of clauses for a conjunction in the table */
> >> + uint32_t max_conj_depth;
> >> };
> >>
> >> /* Interface for OVN main loop. */
> >> diff --git a/include/ovn/expr.h b/include/ovn/expr.h
> >> index 22f633e57..714e21add 100644
> >> --- a/include/ovn/expr.h
> >> +++ b/include/ovn/expr.h
> >> @@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ bool expr_evaluate(const struct expr *, const struct
> >> flow *uflow,
> >> bool (*lookup_port)(const void *aux, const char
> >> *port_name,
> >> unsigned int *portp),
> >> const void *aux);
> >> +
> >> +void expr_set_force_crossproduct(bool should_force);
> >>
> >> /* Converting expressions to OpenFlow flows. */
> >>
> >> diff --git a/lib/expr.c b/lib/expr.c
> >> index 71de61543..4c164caed 100644
> >> --- a/lib/expr.c
> >> +++ b/lib/expr.c
> >> @@ -3278,6 +3278,12 @@ expr_evaluate(const struct expr *e, const struct
> >> flow *uflow,
> >> OVS_NOT_REACHED();
> >> }
> >> }
> >> +
> >> +void
> >> +expr_set_force_crossproduct(bool should_force)
> >> +{
> >> + force_crossproduct = should_force;
> >> +}
> >>
> >> /* Action parsing helper. */
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.14.5
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
