On 5/7/21 4:42 PM, [email protected] wrote: > From: Numan Siddique <[email protected]> > > Some smart NICs can't offload datapath flows matching on conntrack > fields. If a deployment desires to make use of such smart NICs > then it cannot configure ACLs on the logical switches. If suppose > a logical switch S1 has no ACLs configured and a logical switch S2 > has ACLs configured, then the CMS would expect the datapath flows > belonging to S1 logical ports are offloaded since it has no ACLs. > But this is not working as expected (even if S1 and S2 are > not connected via a logical router). > > ovn-northd generates the below logical flows in ls_in_acl_hint > and ls_in_acl stages for S1 > > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;) > > And the below for S2 > > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=7 , match=(ct.new && !ct.est), > action=(reg0[7] = 1; reg0[9] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=6 , match=(!ct.new && ct.est && > !ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 1), action=(reg0[7] = 1; reg0[9] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=5 , match=(!ct.trk), > action=(reg0[8] = 1; reg0[9] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=4 , match=(!ct.new && ct.est && > !ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(reg0[8] = 1; reg0[10] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=3 , match=(!ct.est), > action=(reg0[9] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=2 , match=(ct.est && > ct_label.blocked == 1), action=(reg0[9] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=1 , match=(ct.est && > ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(reg0[10] = 1; next;) > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(!ct.est && ct.rel && > !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(ct.est && !ct.rel && > !ct.new && !ct.inv && ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 0), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(ct.inv || (ct.est && > ct.rpl && ct_label.blocked == 1)), action=(drop;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535, match=(nd || nd_ra || nd_rs || > mldv1 || mldv2), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=34000, match=(eth.dst == > $svc_monitor_mac), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=1 , match=(ip && (!ct.est || > (ct.est && ct_label.blocked == 1))), action=(reg0[1] = 1; next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=0 , match=(1), action=(next;) > > Because there are higher priority flows in 'ls_in_acl_hint' and > 'ls_in_acl' with the match on conntrack fields, > ovs-vswitchd will generate a datapath flow with the match on ct_state fields > as - > 'ct_state(-new-est-rel-rpl-inv-trk)' for the packet from S1, even though > the S1 pipeline doesn't have logical flows which match on conntrack > fields. [1] has more information. > > Modifying the below flows if a logical switch has no ACLs solves this > problem. > > table=8 (ls_in_acl_hint ), priority=65535 , match=(1), action=(next;) > table=9 (ls_in_acl ), priority=65535 , match=(1), action=(next;) > > With the above flows with higher priority, ovs-vswitchd will not > consider other flows in the same table during translation. > > This patch addresses this issue by using higher prioriy flows (for both > ls_in_acl* and ls_out_acl* stages). > > [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955191#c8 > > Signed-off-by: Numan Siddique <[email protected]> > ---
Hi Numan, A couple of tests are failing after rebase: 789: ovn -- ct.inv usage -- ovn-northd -- dp-groups=yes FAILED (ovn-northd.at:3147) 790: ovn -- ct.inv usage -- ovn-northd FAILED (ovn-northd.at:3147) > v1 -> v2 > ---- > * Rebased to resolve conflicts. > * Addressed review comment from Dumitru. Combined ls_has_stateful_acl() > and ls_has_acl() into one single function - od_ls_update_acls_flags(). Nit: There's no other function in ovn_northd that's prefixed with od_ls_.*(). Maybe it makes sense to rename this to ls_get_acl_flags() to be inline with ls_has_lb_vip()? Regards, Dumitru _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
