Hello Eelco,
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 11:57 AM Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> wrote:
[snip]
> > +bridge("br0")
> > +-------------
> > + 0. priority 32768
> > + NORMAL
> > + -> forwarding to mcast group port
> > + -> forwarding to mcast flood port
> > +
> > +Final flow: unchanged
> > +Megaflow:
> > recirc_id=0,eth,udp,in_port=3,dl_src=aa:55:aa:55:00:ff,dl_dst=01:00:5e:01:01:01,nw_dst=224.1.1.1,nw_frag=no
> > +Datapath actions: 1,2
>
>
> Are we sure the order here is always 1,2 vs the first test you sorted them?
> Same for all the other multi-port tests below?
>
> I did run the test 200+ times, and it seems ok. Trying to understand this, as
> I can see the first one reporting 100,1,2 and 100,2,1.
struct mcast_output out = MCAST_OUTPUT_INIT;
...
if (grp) {
xlate_normal_mcast_send_group(ctx, ms, grp, in_xbundle, &out);
xlate_normal_mcast_send_fports(ctx, ms, in_xbundle, &out);
xlate_normal_mcast_send_mrouters(ctx, ms, in_xbundle, &xvlan,
&out);
...
mcast_output_finish(ctx, &out, in_xbundle, &xvlan);
With:
static void
mcast_output_finish(struct xlate_ctx *ctx, struct mcast_output *out,
struct xbundle *in_xbundle, struct xvlan *xvlan)
{
if (out->flood) {
xlate_normal_flood(ctx, in_xbundle, xvlan);
} else {
for (size_t i = 0; i < out->n; i++) {
output_normal(ctx, out->xbundles[i], xvlan);
}
}
...
In this case, there is no flooding (contrary to previous tests) over
all the ports from this bridge.
There is only one "group" port and one "flood" port and the order is fixed.
--
David Marchand
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
