On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 10:21:38AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 03:30:59AM +0000, Yinpeijun wrote:
> >
> > >>On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 07:27:34AM +0000, Yinpeijun wrote:
> > >> Hi all
> > >> Recently , I run a test two VM commulication with
> > >> vxlan and ovs+dpdk networking(ovs2.7.2). when I add 200 virtual device
> > >> on the physical service of the commulicate vm then check the ping
> > >> result, there is loss packet statistics. Then I use vlan and ovs+dpdk
> > >> networking, do the same thing , there is no loss packets statistics.
> > >> I read the source code and add some log to confirm the
> > >> problem, the final problem I think is unreasonable routing refresh,
> > >> in route_table_rest function delete all items before readding, so in the
> > >> middle of the interval ovs_router_lookup can not find the route then
> > >> cause packet drop. So I think the implementation need to optimize, Any
> > >> advice on how to optimize it?
> >
> > >I don't fully understand your use case. However, if you're not using
> > >DPDK, then OVS isn't doing routing in userspace so this is probably not
> > >the problem.
> >
> > Thank you for your replay, the test case just for reproduce the problem.
> > The actual scene is to create or migrate virtual machines in openstack
> > env. Correspondence will be created linux bridge
> > and other virtual device.
> >
> > There is also have problem in netdev dataptah without dpdk. vxlan tunnel
> > need route in userspace and ovs maintain the route table as follow:
> > ovs-appctl ovs/route/show
> > Route Table:
> > Cached: x.xx.1.10/32 dev eth0 SRC x.xx.1.10
> > Cached: 10.0.0.10/32 dev brcps SRC 10.0.0.10
> > Cached: 127.0.0.1/32 dev lo SRC 127.0.0.1
> >
> > So when I create virtual device trigger ovs refresh the route then affect
> > the already existing virtual machine communication.
>
> This is the same datapath, really, it's just that most people use it
> with DPDK, and so the solution would be the same.
>
> I think that the problem you're talking about can be fixed by holding
> the mutex in route_table_reset() across the entire update, instead of
> just for each individual operation on the routing table. Does that make
> sense?
I sent a patch. Will you test it?
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/884064/
Thanks,
Ben.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
