On 2/23/2021 12:48 PM, Sriharsha Basavapatna wrote:
On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 7:04 PM Eli Britstein <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/18/2021 6:38 PM, Kovacevic, Marko wrote:
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
<...>
Sending to Marko. As he wasn't subscribed to ovs-dev then.
<...>
VXLAN decap in OVS-DPDK configuration consists of two flows:
F1: in_port(ens1f0),eth(),ipv4(),udp(), actions:tnl_pop(vxlan_sys_4789)
F2: tunnel(),in_port(vxlan_sys_4789),eth(),ipv4(), actions:ens1f0_0
F1 is a classification flow. It has outer headers matches and it classifies the
packet as a VXLAN packet, and using tnl_pop action the packet continues
processing in F2.
F2 is a flow that has matches on tunnel metadata as well as on the inner
packet headers (as any other flow).
<...>
Hi Eli,
Hi,
After testing the patchset it seems after the tenth patch I start seeing a
drop in the scatter performance around ~4% decrease across all packet sizes
tested(112,256,512,1518)
Burst measurement see a decrease also but not as much as the scatter does.
Hi Marko,
Thanks for testing this series.
Patch10
fff1f9168 netdev-offload-dpdk: Support tunnel pop action
It doesn't make sense that this commit causes any degradation as it only
enhances offloads that are not in the datapath and not done for
virtio-user ports in any case.
Patch 10 enables offload for flow F1 with tnl_pop action. If
hw_offload is enabled, then the new code to offload this flow would be
executed for virtio-user ports as well, since this flow is independent
of the end point port (whether virtio or vf-rep).
No. virtio-user ports won't have "flow_api" function pointer to dpdk
offload provider. Although, this tnl_pop flow is on the PF, so it is not
virtio-user.
Before this patch (i.e, with the original code in master/2.15),
parse_flow_actions() would fail for TUNNEL_POP action. But with the
new code, this action is processed by the function -
add_tnl_pop_action(). There is some processing in this function,
including a new rte_flow API (rte_flow_tunnel_decap_set) to the PMD.
Maybe this is adding some overhead ?
The new API is processed in the offload thread, not in the datapath.
Indeed it can affect the datapath, depending if/how the PF's PMD
support/implementation.
As seen from Marko's configuration line, there is no experimental
support, so there are no new offloads either.
Thanks,
-Harsha
Could you please double check?
I would expect maybe a degradation with:
Patch 12: 8a21a377c dpif-netdev: Provide orig_in_port in metadata for
tunneled packets
Patch 6: e548c079d dpif-netdev: Add HW miss packet state recover logic
Could you please double check what is the offending commit?
Do you compile with ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API defined or not?
The test used for this is a 32 virito-user ports with 1Millions flows.
Could you please elaborate exactly about your setup and test?
What are "1M flows"? what are the differences between them?
What are the OpenFlow rules you use?
Are there any other configurations set (other_config for example)?
What is being done with the packets in the guest side? all ports are in
the same VM?
Traffic @ Phy NIC Rx:
Ether()/IP()/UDP()/VXLAN()/Ether()/IP()
Burst: on the outer ip we do a burst of 32 packets with same ip then switch for
next 32 and so on
Scatter: for scatter we do incrementally for 32
And on the inner packet we have a total of 1048576 flows
I can send on a diagram directly just restricted with html here to send the
diagram here of the test setup
As commented above, I would appreciate more details about your tests and
setup.
Thanks,
Eli
Thanks
Marko K
_______________________________________________
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
