On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 10:23:42PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Isaku Yamahata <yamah...@valinux.co.jp> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 02:08:03PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Isaku Yamahata <yamah...@valinux.co.jp> > >> wrote: > >> > The upstream has the fix for dev_forward_skb() to reset pkt_type to > >> > PACKET_HOST. the change set of 06a23fe31ca3992863721f21bdb0307af93da807 > >> > So the pkt_type of PACKET_OTHERHOST doesn't come in. > >> > This patch is a workaround for older kernel, reset skb->pkt_type when > >> > receiving pkt_type of PACKET_OTHERHOST. > >> > > >> > When two tunnel ports created on two OVS bridges on same host and > >> > two ports are the end point of the tunnel, packets are dropped as below. > >> > > >> > If a packet has pkt_type of PACKET_OTHERHOST when coming to ovs bridge, > >> > the packet is dropped by ip_rcv() if rules are installed and skb are > >> > forwarded by loopback device. > >> > Packet isn't dropped if flow rule isn't installed in kernel datapath, > >> > OVS_ACTION_ATTR_OUTPUT is used to send the packet. > >> > > >> > netns A | root netns | netns B > >> > veth<->veth=ovs bridge=gre<-loop back->gre=ovs bridge=veth<->veth > >> > > >> > arp packet -> > >> > pkt_type > >> > BROADCAST------------>ip_rcv()------------------------> > >> > > >> > <- arp reply > >> > pkt_type > >> > > >> > rule exists > >> > ip_rcv()<-----------------OTHERHOST > >> > drop > >> > > >> > <--------------------ip_rcv()<--- PACKET_HOST rule doesn't > >> > exists > >> > pass ^ | > >> > | |upcall > >> > | V > >> > OVS_ACTION_ATTR_OUTPUT > >> > ovs-switchd > >> > > >> > Cc: Murphy McCauley <murphy.mccau...@gmail.com> > >> > Cc: Jesse Gross <je...@nicira.com> > >> > Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <yamah...@valinux.co.jp> > >> > >> Doesn't the upstream change only work if you go through a veth first? > > > > Basically right. macvlan/macvtap and l2tp are also covered. > > This patch is consistent with iptunnel_pull_header() which sets pkt_type > > to PACKET_HOST when receiving skb. > > > > > >> What happens if the physical device is directly attached to OVS? > > > > If physical device is promiscuous mode off, skb with pkt_type=OTHERHOST > > doesn't come in usually. So the behavior is not changed. > > If promiscuous mode is on, packets of OTHERHOST is affected with this > > patch. And such packets will go through tunnel port and be handled > > by host ip layer. This is an expected behavior, I think. > > My impression is that this is intended to be a backport and not needed > on new kernels, right? However, in that case won't we have different > behavior in the case of promiscuous mode?
Ah, that's right. The commit message/comments are not appropriate as you point out. Can you please give me suggestion to make progress? - change commit message/comment? as this patch is also necessary for new kernels. - change patch itself? What approach do you prefer? I don't think I will be able to persuade netdev people to modify loop back device. thanks, -- yamahata _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
