Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-29 Thread James Page 
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 at 00:08 Ben Pfaff  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:26:38PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
> >
> >
> > From:  on behalf of James Page <
> james.p...@ubuntu.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
> > To: "b...@openvswitch.org" 
> > Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212
> 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0
> release for Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one
> and one with dpdk enabled.
> >
> > I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests with
> the DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla
> build is fine.
> >
> > James
> >
> > These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
> > If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the packets
> coming an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
> > In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.
>
> All of the tests in the testsuite should always pass, or be skipped,
> regardless of configuration, so if some of the tests are inappropriate
> for a given configuration then they need AT_SKIP_IF([...]) to ensure
> that they get skipped.
>

Glad to hear that - as part of the vanilla and DPDK binary builds, we run
the complete test suite with both sets of binaries; the smaller the sauce
we have to apply in the execution of the tests for the DPDK build the
better!

Cheers

James
___
discuss mailing list
disc...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss

Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-08 Thread Darrell Ball 


-Original Message-
From: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 4:07 PM
To: Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com>
Cc: Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org>, "b...@openvswitch.org" <b...@openvswitch.org>
Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 
1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:52:36PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org>
> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 3:43 PM
> To: Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com>
> Cc: James Page <james.p...@ubuntu.com>, "b...@openvswitch.org" 
<b...@openvswitch.org>
    > Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 
1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
> 
> On 8 August 2017 at 09:26, Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: <ovs-discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org> on behalf of James Page
> > <james.p...@ubuntu.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
> > To: "b...@openvswitch.org" <b...@openvswitch.org>
> > Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 
1212 1213
> > 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0 
release
> > for Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one 
and one
> > with dpdk enabled.
> >
> >
> >
> > I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests 
with the
> > DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla 
build is
> > fine.
> >
> >
> >
> > James
> >
> >
> >
> > These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
> >
> > If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the 
packets
> > coming an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
> >
> > In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.
> >
> >
> >
> > Are you able to run these tests as we do without “–with-dpdk” ?
> 
> Hmm, this seems surprising to me - I thought that "--with-dpdk" mostly
> just enables another netdevice implementation. Why would this affect
> input/output with netdev-dummy devices?
> 
> For what it's worth, I tried a run of the testsuite with OVS built
> "--with-dpdk" on branch-2.7 and it worked fine:
> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__travis-2Dci.org_joestringer_openvswitch_jobs_262439494=DwIFaQ=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ=BVhFA09CGX7JQ5Ih-uZnsw=2rYtIAwBngD_iZxhgs9_RxL9aNIlVqYJNRfdSppMEKw=j1JxZ5I8Yj0xapAPLtfpPqwTHiqQEUmUf2ZBdqdJkOo=
 
> 
> The test failures for the first few are hard-failures (ie ovs uses
> WAIT_UNTIL for something that never succeeds), examples below where
> OVS was waiting to receive packets that never arrive:
> 
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9016: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2
> 
'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9018: hard failure
> 
> ---
> 
> Some of the later failures are a bit more interesting:
> 
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9161: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2
> 
'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9164: cat ovs-vswitchd.log | strip_ufid |
> filter_flow_install
> --- - 2017-08-08 09:39:36.051525087 +
> +++ 
/build/openvswitch-NQWKUM/openvswitch-2.8.0~git20170807.17b6e3ce8/_dpdk/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/1214/stdout
> 2017-08-08 09:39:36.046218819 +
> @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
> 
-ct_state(+new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
> actions:d

Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-08 Thread Ben Pfaff 
On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 04:26:38PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
> 
> 
> From:  on behalf of James Page 
> 
> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
> To: "b...@openvswitch.org" 
> Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 
> 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
> 
> Hi
> 
> I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0 release 
> for Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one and one 
> with dpdk enabled.
> 
> I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests with the 
> DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla build is 
> fine.
> 
> James
> 
> These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
> If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the packets 
> coming an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
> In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.

All of the tests in the testsuite should always pass, or be skipped,
regardless of configuration, so if some of the tests are inappropriate
for a given configuration then they need AT_SKIP_IF([...]) to ensure
that they get skipped.
___
discuss mailing list
disc...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss

Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-08 Thread Ben Pfaff 
On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:52:36PM +, Darrell Ball wrote:
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org>
> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 3:43 PM
> To: Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com>
> Cc: James Page <james.p...@ubuntu.com>, "b...@openvswitch.org" 
> <b...@openvswitch.org>
> Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 
> 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
> 
> On 8 August 2017 at 09:26, Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: <ovs-discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org> on behalf of James Page
> > <james.p...@ubuntu.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
> > To: "b...@openvswitch.org" <b...@openvswitch.org>
> > Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 
> 1213
> > 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0 
> release
> > for Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one and 
> one
> > with dpdk enabled.
> >
> >
> >
> > I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests with 
> the
> > DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla 
> build is
> > fine.
> >
> >
> >
> > James
> >
> >
> >
> > These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
> >
> > If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the packets
> > coming an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
> >
> > In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.
> >
> >
> >
> > Are you able to run these tests as we do without “–with-dpdk” ?
> 
> Hmm, this seems surprising to me - I thought that "--with-dpdk" mostly
> just enables another netdevice implementation. Why would this affect
> input/output with netdev-dummy devices?
> 
> For what it's worth, I tried a run of the testsuite with OVS built
> "--with-dpdk" on branch-2.7 and it worked fine:
> 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__travis-2Dci.org_joestringer_openvswitch_jobs_262439494=DwIFaQ=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ=BVhFA09CGX7JQ5Ih-uZnsw=2rYtIAwBngD_iZxhgs9_RxL9aNIlVqYJNRfdSppMEKw=j1JxZ5I8Yj0xapAPLtfpPqwTHiqQEUmUf2ZBdqdJkOo=
>  
> 
> The test failures for the first few are hard-failures (ie ovs uses
> WAIT_UNTIL for something that never succeeds), examples below where
> OVS was waiting to receive packets that never arrive:
> 
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9016: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2
> 
> 'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9018: hard failure
> 
> ---
> 
> Some of the later failures are a bit more interesting:
> 
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9161: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2
> 
> 'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9164: cat ovs-vswitchd.log | strip_ufid |
> filter_flow_install
> --- - 2017-08-08 09:39:36.051525087 +
> +++ 
> /build/openvswitch-NQWKUM/openvswitch-2.8.0~git20170807.17b6e3ce8/_dpdk/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/1214/stdout
> 2017-08-08 09:39:36.046218819 +
> @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
> 
> -ct_state(+new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
> actions:drop
> 
> -ct_state(-new+est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
> actions:1
> 
> +ct_state(-new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
> actions:drop
>  
> recirc_id(0),in_port(1),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
> actions:ct(commit),2
>  
> recirc_id(0),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
> actions:ct,recirc(0x1)
> 
> ---
> 
> ../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9738: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p1
> 
> '50

Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-08 Thread Darrell Ball 


-Original Message-
From: Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 3:43 PM
To: Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com>
Cc: James Page <james.p...@ubuntu.com>, "b...@openvswitch.org" 
<b...@openvswitch.org>
Subject: Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 
1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

On 8 August 2017 at 09:26, Darrell Ball <db...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> From: <ovs-discuss-boun...@openvswitch.org> on behalf of James Page
> <james.p...@ubuntu.com>
> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
> To: "b...@openvswitch.org" <b...@openvswitch.org>
> Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213
> 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0 
release
> for Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one and one
> with dpdk enabled.
>
>
>
> I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests with 
the
> DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla build 
is
> fine.
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
>
> If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the packets
> coming an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
>
> In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.
>
>
>
> Are you able to run these tests as we do without “–with-dpdk” ?

Hmm, this seems surprising to me - I thought that "--with-dpdk" mostly
just enables another netdevice implementation. Why would this affect
input/output with netdev-dummy devices?

For what it's worth, I tried a run of the testsuite with OVS built
"--with-dpdk" on branch-2.7 and it worked fine:

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__travis-2Dci.org_joestringer_openvswitch_jobs_262439494=DwIFaQ=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ=BVhFA09CGX7JQ5Ih-uZnsw=2rYtIAwBngD_iZxhgs9_RxL9aNIlVqYJNRfdSppMEKw=j1JxZ5I8Yj0xapAPLtfpPqwTHiqQEUmUf2ZBdqdJkOo=
 

The test failures for the first few are hard-failures (ie ovs uses
WAIT_UNTIL for something that never succeeds), examples below where
OVS was waiting to receive packets that never arrive:

../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9016: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2

'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9018: hard failure

---

Some of the later failures are a bit more interesting:

../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9161: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2

'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9164: cat ovs-vswitchd.log | strip_ufid |
filter_flow_install
--- - 2017-08-08 09:39:36.051525087 +
+++ 
/build/openvswitch-NQWKUM/openvswitch-2.8.0~git20170807.17b6e3ce8/_dpdk/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/1214/stdout
2017-08-08 09:39:36.046218819 +
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@

-ct_state(+new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
actions:drop

-ct_state(-new+est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
actions:1

+ct_state(-new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
actions:drop
 
recirc_id(0),in_port(1),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
actions:ct(commit),2
 
recirc_id(0),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
actions:ct,recirc(0x1)

---

../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9738: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p1

'505400095054000a08004528258e40004006ff3d0a0101020a01010100020001396bb55e8cadbf8a501a5ec1'
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9740: ovs-appctl revalidator/purge
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9744: cat ofctl_monitor.log
--- /dev/null 2017-04-26 10:10:32.404961898 +
+++ 
/build/openvswitch-NQWKUM/openvswitch-2.8.0~git20170807.17b6e3ce8/_dpdk/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/1225/stdout
2017-08-08 09:40:40.454215126 +
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+NXT_PACKET_IN (xid=0x0): table_id=1 cookie=0x1 total_len=54
ct_state=inv|trk,in_port=1 (via action) data_len=54 (unbuffered)

+tcp,vlan_tci=0x00

Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-08 Thread Joe Stringer 
On 8 August 2017 at 09:26, Darrell Ball  wrote:
>
>
>
>
> From:  on behalf of James Page
> 
> Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
> To: "b...@openvswitch.org" 
> Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213
> 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed
>
>
>
> Hi
>
>
>
> I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0 release
> for Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one and one
> with dpdk enabled.
>
>
>
> I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests with the
> DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla build is
> fine.
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
>
> If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the packets
> coming an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
>
> In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.
>
>
>
> Are you able to run these tests as we do without “–with-dpdk” ?

Hmm, this seems surprising to me - I thought that "--with-dpdk" mostly
just enables another netdevice implementation. Why would this affect
input/output with netdev-dummy devices?

For what it's worth, I tried a run of the testsuite with OVS built
"--with-dpdk" on branch-2.7 and it worked fine:
https://travis-ci.org/joestringer/openvswitch/jobs/262439494

The test failures for the first few are hard-failures (ie ovs uses
WAIT_UNTIL for something that never succeeds), examples below where
OVS was waiting to receive packets that never arrive:

../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9016: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2
'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9018: hard failure

---

Some of the later failures are a bit more interesting:

../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9161: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p2
'in_port(2),eth(src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dst=50:54:00:00:00:09),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=10.1.1.2,dst=10.1.1.1,proto=17,tos=0,ttl=64,frag=no),udp(src=2,dst=1)'
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9164: cat ovs-vswitchd.log | strip_ufid |
filter_flow_install
--- - 2017-08-08 09:39:36.051525087 +
+++ 
/build/openvswitch-NQWKUM/openvswitch-2.8.0~git20170807.17b6e3ce8/_dpdk/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/1214/stdout
2017-08-08 09:39:36.046218819 +
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
-ct_state(+new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
actions:drop
-ct_state(-new+est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
actions:1
+ct_state(-new-est+trk),recirc_id(0x1),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(frag=no),
actions:drop
 
recirc_id(0),in_port(1),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
actions:ct(commit),2
 
recirc_id(0),in_port(2),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(proto=17,frag=no),
actions:ct,recirc(0x1)

---

../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9738: ovs-appctl netdev-dummy/receive p1
'505400095054000a08004528258e40004006ff3d0a0101020a01010100020001396bb55e8cadbf8a501a5ec1'
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9740: ovs-appctl revalidator/purge
../../tests/ofproto-dpif.at:9744: cat ofctl_monitor.log
--- /dev/null 2017-04-26 10:10:32.404961898 +
+++ 
/build/openvswitch-NQWKUM/openvswitch-2.8.0~git20170807.17b6e3ce8/_dpdk/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/1225/stdout
2017-08-08 09:40:40.454215126 +
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+NXT_PACKET_IN (xid=0x0): table_id=1 cookie=0x1 total_len=54
ct_state=inv|trk,in_port=1 (via action) data_len=54 (unbuffered)
+tcp,vlan_tci=0x,dl_src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dl_dst=50:54:00:00:00:09,nw_src=10.1.1.2,nw_dst=10.1.1.1,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=64,tp_src=2,tp_dst=1,tcp_flags=ack
tcp_csum:629b
+NXT_PACKET_IN (xid=0x0): table_id=1 cookie=0x1 total_len=55
ct_state=inv|trk,in_port=1 (via action) data_len=55 (unbuffered)
+tcp,vlan_tci=0x,dl_src=50:54:00:00:00:0a,dl_dst=50:54:00:00:00:09,nw_src=10.1.1.2,nw_dst=10.1.1.1,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=64,tp_src=2,tp_dst=1,tcp_flags=psh|ack
tcp_csum:5892
+NXT_PACKET_IN (xid=0x0): table_id=1 cookie=0x1 total_len=54
ct_state=inv|trk,in_port=2 (via action) data_len=54 (unbuffered)

---

Perhaps the activation of DPDK code is somehow adding extra checks on
things like packet checksums, but the packet passing through are not
fully formed so they get marked as invalid?
___
discuss mailing list
disc...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss

Re: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

2017-08-08 Thread Darrell Ball 


From:  on behalf of James Page 

Date: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM
To: "b...@openvswitch.org" 
Subject: [ovs-discuss] [openvswitch 2.8.0 dpdk] testsuite: 1211 1212 1213 1214 
1215 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1224 1225 1226 2338 failed

Hi

I'm cutting builds from branch-2.8 in preparation for the ovs 2.8.0 release for 
Ubuntu; we build and test two sets of binaries - a vanilla one and one with 
dpdk enabled.

I see test failures on all of the "ofproto-dpif - conntrack" tests with the 
DPDK build and with the ovn ACL test (see attached logs).  Vanilla build is 
fine.

James

These are generic tests and should not be run with-dpdk set.
If you run these tests --with-dpdk, some tests will consider the packets coming 
an actual dpdk interface, which they are not.
In this case, the packets will be marked with a bad checksum.

Are you able to run these tests as we do without “–with-dpdk” ?

Thanks Darrell


Also tracking this in Ubuntu under [0].

Cheers

James

[0] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openvswitch/+bug/1709272
___
discuss mailing list
disc...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-discuss