>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
ok, I am glad to. I will do this test as soon as possible and tell you the test
result later.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
