Hi, Add some updates:
1. We added a debug attribute `state_before ` to the ukey to record more life cycle details of a ukey: state_where = 0x55576027b868 "ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:XXXX", [1], it is UKEY_DELETED. state_before = 0x55576027b630 "ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:XXXX", [2], it was UKEY_EVICTED. [1] https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L1897 [2] https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L2470 Still, all of the ukeys did the replace action. 2. The ukey circular buffer [1] does not work well, the buffer still has {0} after a long time run, and the number is absolutely less than `counter_upcall_ukey_free`. [1] https://github.com/gotostack/ovs/commit/939d88c3c5fcdb446b01f2afa8f1e80c3929db46 And, can not add an `allocate` entry to this buffer for "ukey xmalloc". The circular buffer mutex seems not to work well, core many times at `ovs_mutex_unlock(&ukey_free_buffer.mutex)`. 3. Ilya's patch [2] was applied, but I have not seen the abort log for now. [2] https://github.com/igsilya/ovs/commit/8268347a159b5afa884f5b3008897878b5b520f5 4. dump all ukeys from the core file, we noticed that almost all UKEY_EVICTED ukeys are changed state at `transition_ukey_at` by the revalidator thread. (The `state_thread` attribute of the ukey) But, the core bt shows the related ukey was changed state at PMD thread. For instance: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal ukey and the revalidator thread: (struct umap *) 0x55cce9556140: (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aad584a80: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aac24ce20: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aac6526e0: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aad731970: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aac91ce50: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aadd69be0: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aad759040: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3a8c0d6d50: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3a8c851300: state = UKEY_EVICTED state_thread = 5 #8 0x000055cce5d7005f in ovsthread_wrapper (aux_=<optimized out>) at lib/ovs-thread.c:422 auxp = <optimized out> aux = {start = 0x55cce5c9c0d0 <udpif_revalidator>, arg = 0x55cce9595780, name = "revalidator\000\000\000\000"} id = 5 subprogram_name = 0x7f3ad00008c0 "\020 " #9 0x00007f3af2afee65 in start_thread (arg=0x7f3ae2986700) at pthread_create.c:307 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> core ukey and PMD thread p * (struct udpif_key *) 0x7f3aac156e80 $2 = {cmap_node = {next = {p = 0x7f3aaec2b3a0}}, key = 0x7f3aac402810, key_len = 0, mask = 0x0, mask_len = 172, ufid = {u32 = {2563111187, 2445823588, 3143939231, 3011838433}, u64 = {lo = 10504732324808489235, hi = 12935747573714826399}}, ufid_present = true, hash = 2623373230, pmd_id = 35, mutex = {lock = {__data = {__lock = 0, __count = 0, __owner = 0, __nusers = 0, __kind = -1, __spins = 0, __elision = 0, __list = { __prev = 0x0, __next = 0x0}}, __size = '\000' <repeats 16 times>, "\377\377\377\377", '\000' <repeats 19 times>, __align = 0}, where = 0x0}, stats = {n_packets = 3, n_bytes = 852, used = 871199854, tcp_flags = 16}, created = 871199014, dump_seq = 8822382946, reval_seq = 8822381178, state = UKEY_DELETED, state_thread = 8 PMD thread ID: #6 0x000055cce5d7005f in ovsthread_wrapper (aux_=<optimized out>) at lib/ovs-thread.c:422 auxp = <optimized out> aux = {start = 0x55cce5ce2460 <pmd_thread_main>, arg = 0x7f3ab2e6a010, name = "pmd-c35/id:\000:\177\000"} id = 8 subprogram_name = 0x7f3aac0008c0 "p\v\"\255:\177" #7 0x00007f3af2afee65 in start_thread (arg=0x7f3ae0582700) at pthread_create.c:307 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The running threads are: # ps -T -o spid,comm $(pidof ovs-vswitchd) SPID COMMAND 100866 ovs-vswitchd 100867 eal-intr-thread 100868 rte_mp_handle 100872 ovs-vswitchd 100873 dpdk_watchdog1 100876 urcu2 100888 ct_clean7 100889 ipf_clean6 100890 hw_offload3 100891 handler4 100892 revalidator5 # 1 revalidator thread 100893 pmd-c03/id:9 100894 pmd-c35/id:8 # Mostly 1 PMD thread is working! Another is idle forever. 100925 vhost_reconn 100926 vhost-events So, this can prove that there are two threads were trying to manipulate the same ukey? * PMD thread replaced the old_ukey and transitioned the state. * RCU thread freed the ukey mutex. * The revalidator thread tries to lock the old_ukey mutex. https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/2024-February/052960.html Any idea to simulate the race contion？ Thank you. Regards, LIU Yulong On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 6:14 PM Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On 27 Feb 2024, at 9:49, LIU Yulong wrote: > > > Yes, that makes sense. > > > > Another question is how to distinguish the core at line of > > ovs_mutex_trylock in revalidator_sweep__ is after the free(ukey), > > since the core trace has no timestamp. > > This is hard to figure out without adding a time variable (and make sure it’s > not optimized out) in revalidator_sweep__() > > As you are using OVS-DPDK, you can read the values from the pmd->ctx.now > context, which should be close. > > > This line in the function 'ukey_create__' should be the only place > > where ovs allocated the memory for ukey: > > https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/master/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L1777 > > > > Right? > > Yes, this should be the only place. > > > > > If it is true, I will update the buffer structure, and a > > counter_upcall_ukey_allocate as well. > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 3:34 PM Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 27 Feb 2024, at 4:44, LIU Yulong wrote: > >> > >>> @Eelco, as you suggested, added such circular buffer to my local OVS: > >>> https://github.com/gotostack/ovs/commit/939d88c3c5fcdb446b01f2afa8f1e80c3929db46 > >> > >> I should also add allocate logging, or else you might not know if a buffer > >> was allocated at the same address. > >> Maybe add a bool to the record structure to indicate if it’s an allocate > >> or free. > >> > >> //Eelco > >> > >>> gdb shows such data structure: > >>> 2232 ukey_free_buffer.index = (ukey_free_buffer.index + 1) % (1024 > >>> * 1024); // Circular buffer > >>> (gdb) p ukey_free_buffer > >>> $1 = { > >>> records = {{ > >>> ukey_addr = 0x7f8a0d871700, > >>> timestamp = 1709003328 > >>> }, { > >>> ukey_addr = 0x7f8a0f969120, > >>> timestamp = 1709003365 > >>> }, { > >>> ukey_addr = 0x7f8a0defe190, > >>> timestamp = 1709003393 > >>> }, { > >>> ukey_addr = 0x7f8a0984aea0, > >>> timestamp = 1709003452 > >>> }...}, > >>> index = 3, > >>> mutex = { > >>> lock = { > >>> __data = { > >>> __lock = 1, > >>> __count = 0, > >>> __owner = 45210, > >>> __nusers = 1, > >>> __kind = 2, > >>> __spins = 0, > >>> __elision = 0, > >>> __list = { > >>> __prev = 0x0, > >>> __next = 0x0 > >>> } > >>> }, > >>> __size = > >>> "\001\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\232\260\000\000\001\000\000\000\002", > >>> '\000' <repeats 22 times>, > >>> __align = 1 > >>> }, > >>> where = 0x55c35a347d18 "ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:2229" > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> and counter_upcall_ukey_free is: > >>> $2 = {name = 0x5622b448f612 "upcall_ukey_free", count = 0x5622b41047f0 > >>> <upcall_ukey_free_count>, total = 79785, last_total = 79785, min = {0, > >>> 0, 0, 0, 0, 55, 22681, 11703, 13877, 12750, 0, 18719}, hr = {79785, > >>> 0 <repeats 59 times>}} > >>> > >>> Let's see how this goes. > >>> > >>> Thank you. > >>> > >>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 9:05 AM LIU Yulong <liuyulong...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> @Ilya, thank you, I will add that patch. > >>>> > >>>> @Eelco, thank you again, I will add a RL log to the free(ukey). Hope > >>>> we can get something useful. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 7:55 PM Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@ovn.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On 2/26/24 11:20, Eelco Chaudron wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 26 Feb 2024, at 11:10, LIU Yulong wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Eelco, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thank you for the quick response. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I did not add those logs, because in order to reproduce the issue, we > >>>>>>> have to send lots of packets to the host. > >>>>>>> So there are too many ukeys created/deleted to do logging. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Maybe a circular buffer with all alloc/free (+ 1ukey address, and > >>>>>> timestamp), 1 or 2 Mb of memory can hold a lot. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> And can we ensure that this [1] is the only place for ovs to free the > >>>>>>> ukey? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> [1] > >>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L2084 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, this should be the only place, and should always be done through > >>>>>> an RCU delayed delete. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> For last mail, can this issue be concurrent read-and-update/delete? > >>>>>>> The revalidator_sweep__ is trying to lock the ukey->mutex, while > >>>>>>> another thread is updating the ukey->mutex to NULL and free ukey. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This should not happen as the delete should happen by the delayed RCU > >>>>>> delete, and if the ukey is still in the cmap after the delayed delete > >>>>>> (quiescent state) something is wrong. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I agree with Eelco and I don't see any abvious issues with the current > >>>>> implementation. > >>>>> > >>>>> However, the ususal suspect for RCU problems is entering quiescent state > >>>>> while iterating RCU-protected structure. Though I'm not sure how that > >>>>> can > >>>>> happen in the revalidator, usually such issues are hiding somewhere way > >>>>> down the call stack. I made a small patch that can help to be sure that > >>>>> this doesn't actually happen in your setup: > >>>>> https://github.com/igsilya/ovs/commit/8268347a159b5afa884f5b3008897878b5b520f5 > >>>>> > >>>>> Could you try it? > >>>>> > >>>>> The change will log an error message and abort the process if we happen > >>>>> to enter quiescent state while iterating over the hash map. Core dump > >>>>> will point to a problematic call. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> LIU Yulong > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 5:41 PM Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 26 Feb 2024, at 9:33, LIU Yulong wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I have read the code by comparing the call stack of the core files > >>>>>>>>> carefully, and found > >>>>>>>>> a potential race condition. Please confirm whether the following 3 > >>>>>>>>> threads > >>>>>>>>> have a race condition. Just did some code trace, can such > >>>>>>>>> race condition happen? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> * PMD thread1 ===================================: > >>>>>>>>> -> pmd_thread_main > >>>>>>>>> -> dp_netdev_process_rxq_port > >>>>>>>>> -> dp_netdev_input > >>>>>>>>> -> dp_netdev_input__ > >>>>>>>>> -> handle_packet_upcall > >>>>>>>>> -> dp_netdev_upcall > >>>>>>>>> -> upcall_cb > >>>>>>>>> -> ukey_install > >>>>>>>>> -> ukey_install__ > >>>>>>>>> -> try_ukey_replace: > >>>>>>>>> ovs_mutex_lock(&new_ukey->mutex); > >>>>>>>>> <---------- the CMAP_FOR_EACH loop in the revalidator_sweep__ run a > >>>>>>>>> bit earlier than the cmap_replace next line, so the old_ukey can be > >>>>>>>>> iterated. [1] > >>>>>>>>> cmap_replace(&umap->cmap, &old_ukey->cmap_node, > >>>>>>>>> &new_ukey->cmap_node, new_ukey->hash); > >>>>>>>>> ovsrcu_postpone(ukey_delete__, old_ukey); > >>>>>>>>> <-------- delete the ukey asynchronously. [2] > >>>>>>>>> transition_ukey(old_ukey, UKEY_DELETED); <-------- > >>>>>>>>> transition the ukey state to UKEY_DELETED, most core files show that > >>>>>>>>> the ukey last state change was at this line. [3] > >>>>>>>>> transition_ukey(new_ukey, UKEY_VISIBLE); > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> [1] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L1892 > >>>>>>>>> [2] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L1896 > >>>>>>>>> [3] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L1897 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> This function try_ukey_replace was called many times, because the > >>>>>>>>> `counter_upcall_ukey_replace` is not zero. > >>>>>>>>> For instance: > >>>>>>>>> { > >>>>>>>>> name = 0x55ba9755206b "upcall_ukey_replace", > >>>>>>>>> count = 0x55ba971c7610 <upcall_ukey_replace_count>, > >>>>>>>>> total = 2287997, > >>>>>>>>> last_total = 2287997, > >>>>>>>>> min = {221, 247, 444, 278, 324, 570, 379, 464, 283, 280, 0, 427}, > >>>>>>>>> hr = {3300, 4378, 3557, 4554, 3748, 3710, 4340, 3559, 4296, 3759, > >>>>>>>>> 3522, 4136, 3660, 4428, 3802, 3652, 3880, 3375, 4806, 4221, 4158, > >>>>>>>>> 3816, 3750, 3846, 3761, 3653, 4293, 3816, 3723, 3691, 4033, 468, > >>>>>>>>> 4117, > >>>>>>>>> 3659, 4007, 3536, > >>>>>>>>> 3439, 4440, 3388, 4079, 3876, 3865, 4339, 3757, 3481, 4027, > >>>>>>>>> 3989, > >>>>>>>>> 3633, 3737, 3564, 3403, 3992, 3793, 4390, 4124, 4354, 4164, 4383, > >>>>>>>>> 4237, 3667} > >>>>>>>>> } > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> * RCU thread2 ===================================: > >>>>>>>>> -> ovsrcu_postpone_thread > >>>>>>>>> -> ovsrcu_call_postponed > >>>>>>>>> -> ukey_delete__ <------------ This > >>>>>>>>> function is not thead safe IMO, it has mark > >>>>>>>>> OVS_NO_THREAD_SAFETY_ANALYSIS. [4] > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> recirc_refs_unref(&ukey->recircs); > >>>>>>>>> xlate_cache_delete(ukey->xcache); > >>>>>>>>> ofpbuf_delete(ovsrcu_get(struct ofpbuf *, &ukey->actions)); > >>>>>>>>> ovs_mutex_destroy(&ukey->mutex); <-------------- > >>>>>>>>> Just > >>>>>>>>> set ukey mutex to NULL. [5][6][7] > >>>>>>>>> free(ukey); > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> [4] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L2074 > >>>>>>>>> [5] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L2083 > >>>>>>>>> [6] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/lib/ovs-thread.c#L131 > >>>>>>>>> [7] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/lib/ovs-thread.c#L124 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> * revalidator thread3 ===================================: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -> udpif_revalidator > >>>>>>>>> -> revalidator_sweep > >>>>>>>>> -> revalidator_sweep__ > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> CMAP_FOR_EACH(ukey, cmap_node, &umap->cmap) { > >>>>>>>>> enum ukey_state ukey_state; > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> if (ovs_mutex_trylock(&ukey->mutex)) { <-------------- > >>>>>>>>> Core at here, because of the NULL pointer. [8] > >>>>>>>>> continue; > >>>>>>>>> } > >>>>>>>>> [8] > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvswitch/ovs/blob/v2.17.8/ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c#L2900 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> CMIIW, if this race condition can happen, IMO, it is mostly because > >>>>>>>>> the umap is not locked during the sweep CMAP_FOR_EACH loop. > >>>>>>>>> Or some RCU protection did not work properly. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The code looks fine to me, we are taking the lock when we update the > >>>>>>>> cmap, which is a requirement, however iterating over the cmap as > >>>>>>>> done above does not require a lock. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If the RCU protection would have been broken, we would have seen a > >>>>>>>> lot more errors. Did you have any luck adding the traces I suggested > >>>>>>>> earlier, to see if it’s a use after free? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Eelco > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 6:40 PM Eelco Chaudron > >>>>>>>>> <echau...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 21 Feb 2024, at 4:26, LIU Yulong wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you very much for your reply. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The problem is not easy to reproduce, we have to wait a random > >>>>>>>>>>> long time to see > >>>>>>>>>>> if the issue happens again. It can be more than one day or longer. > >>>>>>>>>>> OVS 2.17 with dpdk 20.11 had run to core before, so it's hard to > >>>>>>>>>>> say > >>>>>>>>>>> if it is related to DPDK. > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm running the ovs without offload to see if the issue can > >>>>>>>>>>> happen in > >>>>>>>>>>> recent days. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> And again, TLDR, paste more thread call stacks. > >>>>>>>>>>> Most of the threads are in the state of sched_yield, nanosleep, > >>>>>>>>>>> epoll_wait and poll. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> If this looks like a memory trash issue, it might be hard to > >>>>>>>>>> figure out. Does the ukey show any kind of pattern, i.e. does the > >>>>>>>>>> trashed data look like anything known? > >>>>>>>>>> Maybe it’s a use after free, so you could add some debugging code > >>>>>>>>>> logging/recording all free and xmalloc of the ukey structure, to > >>>>>>>>>> see that when it crashes it was actually allocated? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hope this helps you getting started. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> //Eelco > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The following threads are in working state. So hope this can have > >>>>>>>>>>> clues for investigation. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thread 14 (Thread 0x7fd34002b700 (LWP 91928)): > >>>>>>>>>>> #0 0x00007fd344487b6d in recvmsg () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:81 > >>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x0000562773cb8d03 in mp_handle () > >>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x00007fd344480e65 in start_thread (arg=0x7fd34002b700) at > >>>>>>>>>>> pthread_create.c:307 > >>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007fd34260988d in clone () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thread 13 (Thread 0x7fd3359d7700 (LWP 91929)): > >>>>>>>>>>> #0 0x00007fd34448799d in accept () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:81 > >>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x0000562773cd8f3c in socket_listener () > >>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x00007fd344480e65 in start_thread (arg=0x7fd3359d7700) at > >>>>>>>>>>> pthread_create.c:307 > >>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007fd34260988d in clone () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thread 6 (Thread 0x7fd304663700 (LWP 91965)): > >>>>>>>>>>> #0 0x00007fd34448771d in read () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:81 > >>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x00007fd343b42bfb in _mlx5dv_devx_get_event () from > >>>>>>>>>>> /lib64/libmlx5.so.1 > >>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x0000562773936d86 in mlx5_vdpa_event_handle () > >>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x00007fd344480e65 in start_thread (arg=0x7fd304663700) at > >>>>>>>>>>> pthread_create.c:307 > >>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x00007fd34260988d in clone () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thread 2 (Thread 0x7fd305730700 (LWP 91943)): > >>>>>>>>>>> #0 ccmap_find_slot_protected (count=<synthetic pointer>, > >>>>>>>>>>> hash=hash@entry=1669671676, b=b@entry=0x7fd2f8012a80) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/ccmap.c:278 > >>>>>>>>>>> #1 ccmap_inc_bucket_existing (b=b@entry=0x7fd2f8012a80, > >>>>>>>>>>> hash=hash@entry=1669671676, inc=inc@entry=1) at lib/ccmap.c:281 > >>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x0000562773d4b015 in ccmap_try_inc > >>>>>>>>>>> (impl=impl@entry=0x7fd2f8012a40, hash=hash@entry=1669671676, > >>>>>>>>>>> inc=inc@entry=1) at lib/ccmap.c:464 > >>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x0000562773d4b224 in ccmap_inc > >>>>>>>>>>> (ccmap=ccmap@entry=0x7fd2f802a7e8, > >>>>>>>>>>> hash=1669671676) at lib/ccmap.c:485 > >>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x0000562773d4975a in classifier_replace (cls=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> rule=rule@entry=0x7fd2fac70e28, version=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> conjs=<optimized out>, n_conjs=<optimized out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at lib/classifier.c:579 > >>>>>>>>>>> #5 0x0000562773d49e99 in classifier_insert (cls=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> rule=rule@entry=0x7fd2fac70e28, version=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> conj=<optimized out>, n_conj=<optimized out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at lib/classifier.c:694 > >>>>>>>>>>> #6 0x0000562773d00fc8 in replace_rule_start > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofproto=ofproto@entry=0x5627778cc420, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofm=ofm@entry=0x7fd3057235f0, > >>>>>>>>>>> old_rule=<optimized out>, new_rule=new_rule@entry=0x7fd2fac70e20) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto.c:5645 > >>>>>>>>>>> #7 0x0000562773d010e4 in add_flow_start (ofproto=0x5627778cc420, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofm=0x7fd3057235f0) at ofproto/ofproto.c:5256 > >>>>>>>>>>> #8 0x0000562773d0122d in modify_flows_start__ > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofproto=ofproto@entry=0x5627778cc420, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofm=ofm@entry=0x7fd3057235f0) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto.c:5824 > >>>>>>>>>>> #9 0x0000562773d01eac in modify_flow_start_strict > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofm=0x7fd3057235f0, ofproto=0x5627778cc420) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto.c:5953 > >>>>>>>>>>> #10 ofproto_flow_mod_start (ofproto=0x5627778cc420, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofm=ofm@entry=0x7fd3057235f0) at ofproto/ofproto.c:8112 > >>>>>>>>>>> #11 0x0000562773d0225a in ofproto_flow_mod_learn_start > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofm=ofm@entry=0x7fd3057235f0) at ofproto/ofproto.c:5491 > >>>>>>>>>>> #12 0x0000562773d040ad in ofproto_flow_mod_learn > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofm=ofm@entry=0x7fd3057235f0, keep_ref=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> limit=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> below_limitp=below_limitp@entry=0x7fd305723510) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto.c:5576 > >>>>>>>>>>> #13 0x0000562773d2641e in xlate_learn_action > >>>>>>>>>>> (ctx=ctx@entry=0x7fd305729a60, learn=learn@entry=0x562777db4618) > >>>>>>>>>>> at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:5547 > >>>>>>>>>>> #14 0x0000562773d2aafb in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7232 > >>>>>>>>>>> #15 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777db4470, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #16 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #17 0x0000562773d2ab8d in xlate_ofpact_resubmit > >>>>>>>>>>> (resubmit=0x56277781db28, resubmit=0x56277781db28, > >>>>>>>>>>> resubmit=0x56277781db28, is_last_action=true, ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4823 > >>>>>>>>>>> #18 do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, is_last_action=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=<optimized out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7107 > >>>>>>>>>>> #19 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777ab9220, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #20 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #21 0x0000562773d2ab8d in xlate_ofpact_resubmit > >>>>>>>>>>> (resubmit=0x562777b9f3c8, resubmit=0x562777b9f3c8, > >>>>>>>>>>> resubmit=0x562777b9f3c8, is_last_action=true, ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4823 > >>>>>>>>>>> #22 do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, is_last_action=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=<optimized out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7107 > >>>>>>>>>>> #23 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777d6dc90, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #24 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ---Type <return> to continue, or q <return> to quit--- > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #25 0x0000562773d2ab8d in xlate_ofpact_resubmit > >>>>>>>>>>> (resubmit=0x562777c13c58, resubmit=0x562777c13c58, > >>>>>>>>>>> resubmit=0x562777c13c58, is_last_action=true, ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4823 > >>>>>>>>>>> #26 do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, is_last_action=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=<optimized out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7107 > >>>>>>>>>>> #27 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562778046000, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #28 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #29 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #30 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777ad0ac0, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #31 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #32 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #33 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x56277785c0d0, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #34 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #35 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #36 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777a86ce0, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #37 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #38 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #39 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x56277781b710, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #40 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #41 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofpacts=ofpacts@entry=0x562777833a38, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=ofpacts_len@entry=32, ctx=ctx@entry=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=is_last_action@entry=true, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=group_bucket_action@entry=false) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #42 0x0000562773d30f68 in clone_xlate_actions > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions=0x562777833a38, > >>>>>>>>>>> actions_len=32, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, is_last_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=<optimized out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:5809 > >>>>>>>>>>> #43 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d30d70 <clone_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=true, rule=0x562777ad5640, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #44 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d30d70 > >>>>>>>>>>> <clone_xlate_actions>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #45 0x0000562773d2cf20 in patch_port_output > >>>>>>>>>>> (ctx=ctx@entry=0x7fd305729a60, out_dev=0x562777ebeec0, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=is_last_action@entry=true, in_dev=0x562777f43ee0, > >>>>>>>>>>> in_dev=0x562777f43ee0) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:3890 > >>>>>>>>>>> #46 0x0000562773d2d2f7 in compose_output_action__ > >>>>>>>>>>> (ctx=ctx@entry=0x7fd305729a60, ofp_port=2, xr=xr@entry=0x0, > >>>>>>>>>>> check_stp=check_stp@entry=true, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=is_last_action@entry=true, > >>>>>>>>>>> truncate=truncate@entry=false) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4205 > >>>>>>>>>>> #47 0x0000562773d2fdd0 in compose_output_action (truncate=false, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xr=0x0, ofp_port=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4360 > >>>>>>>>>>> #48 xlate_output_action (ctx=ctx@entry=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, controller_len=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> may_packet_in=may_packet_in@entry=true, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=is_last_action@entry=true, > >>>>>>>>>>> truncate=truncate@entry=false, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=group_bucket_action@entry=false) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:5305 > >>>>>>>>>>> ---Type <return> to continue, or q <return> to quit--- > >>>>>>>>>>> #49 0x0000562773d2972f in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:6960 > >>>>>>>>>>> #50 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777ad5430, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #51 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #52 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions (ofpacts=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=<optimized out>, ctx=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=<optimized out>, group_bucket_action=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #53 0x0000562773d26c85 in xlate_recursively > >>>>>>>>>>> (actions_xlator=0x562773d29490 <do_xlate_actions>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, deepens=false, rule=0x562777ac2fb0, > >>>>>>>>>>> ctx=0x7fd305729a60) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4383 > >>>>>>>>>>> #54 xlate_table_action (ctx=0x7fd305729a60, in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> table_id=<optimized out>, may_packet_in=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> honor_table_miss=<optimized out>, with_ct_orig=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=true, xlator=0x562773d29490 > >>>>>>>>>>> <do_xlate_actions>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:4512 > >>>>>>>>>>> #55 0x0000562773d2ac1c in do_xlate_actions > >>>>>>>>>>> (ofpacts=ofpacts@entry=0x56277797b318, > >>>>>>>>>>> ofpacts_len=ofpacts_len@entry=8, ctx=ctx@entry=0x7fd305729a60, > >>>>>>>>>>> is_last_action=is_last_action@entry=true, > >>>>>>>>>>> group_bucket_action=group_bucket_action@entry=false) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7110 > >>>>>>>>>>> #56 0x0000562773d330d6 in xlate_actions > >>>>>>>>>>> (xin=xin@entry=0x7fd30572a920, > >>>>>>>>>>> xout=xout@entry=0x7fd30572ad38) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7924 > >>>>>>>>>>> #57 0x0000562773d2241b in upcall_xlate (wc=0x7fd30572bfe0, > >>>>>>>>>>> odp_actions=0x7fd30572b7b0, upcall=0x7fd30572acd0, > >>>>>>>>>>> udpif=0x562777850cf0) at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1340 > >>>>>>>>>>> #58 process_upcall (udpif=udpif@entry=0x562777850cf0, > >>>>>>>>>>> upcall=upcall@entry=0x7fd30572acd0, > >>>>>>>>>>> odp_actions=odp_actions@entry=0x7fd30572b7b0, > >>>>>>>>>>> wc=wc@entry=0x7fd30572bfe0) > >>>>>>>>>>> at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1602 > >>>>>>>>>>> #59 0x0000562773d22c39 in upcall_cb (packet=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> flow=0x7fd30572bd40, ufid=<optimized out>, pmd_id=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> type=<optimized out>, userdata=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> actions=0x7fd30572b7b0, wc=0x7fd30572bfe0, > >>>>>>>>>>> put_actions=0x7fd30572b7f0, aux=0x562777850cf0) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1461 > >>>>>>>>>>> #60 0x0000562773d52198 in dp_netdev_upcall > >>>>>>>>>>> (pmd=pmd@entry=0x7fd305731010, packet_=packet_@entry=0x21152c180, > >>>>>>>>>>> flow=flow@entry=0x7fd30572bd40, wc=wc@entry=0x7fd30572bfe0, > >>>>>>>>>>> ufid=ufid@entry=0x7fd30572b790, type=type@entry=DPIF_UC_MISS, > >>>>>>>>>>> userdata=userdata@entry=0x0, actions=actions@entry=0x7fd30572b7b0, > >>>>>>>>>>> put_actions=put_actions@entry=0x7fd30572b7f0) > >>>>>>>>>>> at lib/dpif-netdev.c:9141 > >>>>>>>>>>> #61 0x0000562773d66f13 in handle_packet_upcall > >>>>>>>>>>> (put_actions=0x7fd30572b7f0, actions=0x7fd30572b7b0, > >>>>>>>>>>> key=0x7fd30572cc40, packet=0x21152c180, pmd=0x7fd305731010) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/dpif-netdev.c:11303 > >>>>>>>>>>> #62 fast_path_processing (pmd=pmd@entry=0x7fd305731010, > >>>>>>>>>>> packets_=packets_@entry=0x7fd30572d0c0, > >>>>>>>>>>> keys=keys@entry=0x7fd30572cc30, > >>>>>>>>>>> flow_map=flow_map@entry=0x7fd30572cae0, > >>>>>>>>>>> index_map=index_map@entry=0x7fd30572cad0 "", > >>>>>>>>>>> in_port=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) at lib/dpif-netdev.c:11426 > >>>>>>>>>>> #63 0x0000562773d680c1 in dp_netdev_input__ (pmd=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> packets=<optimized out>, md_is_valid=md_is_valid@entry=false, > >>>>>>>>>>> port_no=<optimized out>) at lib/dpif-netdev.c:11520 > >>>>>>>>>>> #64 0x0000562773d6a15d in dp_netdev_input (pmd=<optimized out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> packets=<optimized out>, port_no=<optimized out>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/dpif-netdev.c:11558 > >>>>>>>>>>> #65 0x0000562773d6a2cf in dp_netdev_process_rxq_port > >>>>>>>>>>> (pmd=pmd@entry=0x7fd305731010, rxq=0x56277796a5e0, port_no=3) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/dpif-netdev.c:6660 > >>>>>>>>>>> #66 0x0000562773d6a759 in pmd_thread_main (f_=<optimized out>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/dpif-netdev.c:8267 > >>>>>>>>>>> #67 0x0000562773df805f in ovsthread_wrapper (aux_=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/ovs-thread.c:422 > >>>>>>>>>>> #68 0x00007fd344480e65 in start_thread (arg=0x7fd305730700) at > >>>>>>>>>>> pthread_create.c:307 > >>>>>>>>>>> #69 0x00007fd34260988d in clone () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thread 1 (Thread 0x7fd334307700 (LWP 91942)): > >>>>>>>>>>> #0 0x00007fd342541337 in __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:55 > >>>>>>>>>>> #1 0x00007fd342542a28 in __GI_abort () at abort.c:90 > >>>>>>>>>>> #2 0x0000562773e2c4ee in ovs_abort_valist (err_no=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>, > >>>>>>>>>>> format=<optimized out>, args=args@entry=0x7fd334302340) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/util.c:499 > >>>>>>>>>>> #3 0x0000562773e2c584 in ovs_abort (err_no=err_no@entry=0, > >>>>>>>>>>> format=format@entry=0x5627740cad18 "%s: %s() passed uninitialized > >>>>>>>>>>> ovs_mutex") at lib/util.c:491 > >>>>>>>>>>> #4 0x0000562773df72e1 in ovs_mutex_lock_at > >>>>>>>>>>> (l_=l_@entry=0x7fd2f907df68, where=where@entry=0x5627740a7fc0 > >>>>>>>>>>> "ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:2214") at lib/ovs-thread.c:75 > >>>>>>>>>>> #5 0x0000562773d1e98d in ukey_delete > >>>>>>>>>>> (umap=umap@entry=0x562777853400, > >>>>>>>>>>> ukey=ukey@entry=0x7fd2f907df20) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:2214 > >>>>>>>>>>> #6 0x0000562773d202da in revalidator_sweep__ > >>>>>>>>>>> (revalidator=revalidator@entry=0x562777897b00, > >>>>>>>>>>> purge=purge@entry=false) at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:3048 > >>>>>>>>>>> #7 0x0000562773d241a6 in revalidator_sweep > >>>>>>>>>>> (revalidator=0x562777897b00) at ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:3072 > >>>>>>>>>>> #8 udpif_revalidator (arg=0x562777897b00) at > >>>>>>>>>>> ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1086 > >>>>>>>>>>> #9 0x0000562773df805f in ovsthread_wrapper (aux_=<optimized > >>>>>>>>>>> out>) at > >>>>>>>>>>> lib/ovs-thread.c:422 > >>>>>>>>>>> #10 0x00007fd344480e65 in start_thread (arg=0x7fd334307700) at > >>>>>>>>>>> pthread_create.c:307 > >>>>>>>>>>> #11 0x00007fd34260988d in clone () at > >>>>>>>>>>> ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>>>>>> LIU Yulong > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 8:12 PM Eelco Chaudron > >>>>>>>>>>> <echau...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Feb 2024, at 13:09, Ilya Maximets wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/24 11:14, Eelco Chaudron wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Feb 2024, at 10:34, LIU Yulong wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi OVS experts, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Our ovs-vswitchd runs to core at the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ovs_mutex_trylock(&ukey->mutex) in the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> function revalidator_sweep__. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've sent the mail before but have no response. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/2023-August/052604.html > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I'm trying to send this mail again. And I may apologize in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advance because > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to post as much useful information as possible > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to help identify > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> potential issues. So this mail will have a really long text. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Compared to the mail 2023-August/052604.html, we upgrade the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OVS to 2.17.8 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and DPDK to 22.11 to pray for good luck that maybe the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community has potential > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes for this issue. But unfortunately, the ovs-vswitchd > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still runs to core. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you mentioned it looks like some memory corruption, which I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have not seen before. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have you tried this without rte offload? This is the only > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature I never used. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a 2.17.9 with DPDK 22.11.6 you could try. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> OVS 2.17 is not supposed to work with DPDK 22.11, it's supposed > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to work with 21.11. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> See the compatibility table here: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://docs.openvswitch.org/en/latest/faq/releases/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Though it's hard to tell if DPDK version is anyhow related to > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the issue. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> My mistake, I was supposed to type 21.11.6 :( But yes if they > >>>>>>>>>>>> are using 22.11, that could also be the problem. I would suggest > >>>>>>>>>>>> using the supported version and see if the problem goes away. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> //Eelco > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list disc...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss
