On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 01:14:00PM +0800, Kmindg G wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:07:14AM +0800, Kmindg G wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:19 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:45:49PM +0800, Kmindg G wrote:
> >> >> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Until now, when it processes OFPT_PORT_MOD message, Open vSwitch has
> >> >> > waited
> >> >> > for ports to notify it that their status has changed before it sends a
> >> >> > port status update to controllers.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Also, Open vSwitch never sent port config updates at all for port
> >> >> > modifications other than OFPPC_PORT_DOWN. I guess that this is a
> >> >> > relic
> >> >> > from the era when there was only one controller, since presumably the
> >> >> > controller already knew that it changed the port configuration. But
> >> >> > in the
> >> >> > multi-controller world, it makes sense to send such port status
> >> >> > updates,
> >> >> > and I couldn't quickly find anything in OF1.3 or OF1.4 that said they
> >> >> > shouldn't be sent.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>
> >> >> > Reported-by: Kmindg G <kmi...@gmail.com>
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> > AUTHORS | 1 +
> >> >> > ofproto/ofproto.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
> >> >> > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > diff --git a/AUTHORS b/AUTHORS
> >> >> > index c557303..2fda8d7 100644
> >> >> > --- a/AUTHORS
> >> >> > +++ b/AUTHORS
> >> >> > @@ -197,6 +197,7 @@ John Hurley john.hur...@netronome.com
> >> >> > Kevin Mancuso kevin.manc...@rackspace.com
> >> >> > Kiran Shanbhog ki...@vmware.com
> >> >> > Kirill Kabardin
> >> >> > +Kmindg G kmi...@gmail.com
> >> >> > Koichi Yagishita yagishita.koi...@jrc.co.jp
> >> >> > Konstantin Khorenko khore...@openvz.org
> >> >> > Kris zhang zhang.k...@gmail.com
> >> >> > diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto.c b/ofproto/ofproto.c
> >> >> > index 62c97a2..48e10ca 100644
> >> >> > --- a/ofproto/ofproto.c
> >> >> > +++ b/ofproto/ofproto.c
> >> >> > @@ -2986,22 +2986,23 @@ update_port_config(struct ofport *port,
> >> >> > enum ofputil_port_config config,
> >> >> > enum ofputil_port_config mask)
> >> >> > {
> >> >> > - enum ofputil_port_config old_config = port->pp.config;
> >> >> > - enum ofputil_port_config toggle;
> >> >> > -
> >> >> > - toggle = (config ^ port->pp.config) & mask;
> >> >> > - if (toggle & OFPUTIL_PC_PORT_DOWN) {
> >> >> > - if (config & OFPUTIL_PC_PORT_DOWN) {
> >> >> > - netdev_turn_flags_off(port->netdev, NETDEV_UP, NULL);
> >> >> > - } else {
> >> >> > - netdev_turn_flags_on(port->netdev, NETDEV_UP, NULL);
> >> >> > - }
> >> >> > + enum ofputil_port_config toggle = (config ^ port->pp.config) &
> >> >> > mask;
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + if (toggle & OFPUTIL_PC_PORT_DOWN
> >> >> > + && (config & OFPUTIL_PC_PORT_DOWN
> >> >> > + ? netdev_turn_flags_off(port->netdev, NETDEV_UP, NULL)
> >> >> > + : netdev_turn_flags_on(port->netdev, NETDEV_UP, NULL))) {
> >> >> > + /* We tried to bring the port up or down, but it failed, so
> >> >> > don't
> >> >> > + * update the "down" bit. */
> >> >> > toggle &= ~OFPUTIL_PC_PORT_DOWN;
> >> >> > }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - port->pp.config ^= toggle;
> >> >> > - if (port->pp.config != old_config) {
> >> >> > + if (toggle) {
> >> >> > + enum ofputil_port_config old_config = port->pp.config;
> >> >> > + port->pp.config ^= toggle;
> >> >> > port->ofproto->ofproto_class->port_reconfigured(port,
> >> >> > old_config);
> >> >> > + connmgr_send_port_status(port->ofproto->connmgr, &port->pp,
> >> >> > + OFPPR_MODIFY);
> >> >> > }
> >> >> > }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > 1.7.10.4
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> looks good to me.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks. What do you think of this version? I think that it retains
> >> > better compatibility with OpenFlow 1.0 in particular.
> >> >
> >> > --8<--------------------------cut here-------------------------->8--
> >> >
> >> > From: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>
> >> > Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:18:51 -0800
> >> > Subject: [PATCH] ofproto: Send port status message for port-mods, right
> >> > away.
> >> >
> >> > Until now, when it processes OFPT_PORT_MOD message, Open vSwitch has
> >> > waited
> >> > for ports to notify it that their status has changed before it sends a
> >> > port status update to controllers.
> >> >
> >> > Also, Open vSwitch never sent port config updates at all for port
> >> > modifications other than OFPPC_PORT_DOWN. I guess that this is a relic
> >> > from the era when there was only one controller, since presumably the
> >> > controller already knew that it changed the port configuration. But in
> >> > the
> >> > multi-controller world, it makes sense to send such port status updates,
> >> > and I couldn't quickly find anything in OF1.3 or OF1.4 that said they
> >> > shouldn't be sent.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com>
> >> > Reported-by: Kmindg G <kmi...@gmail.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > ofproto/connmgr.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >> > ofproto/connmgr.h | 4 ++--
> >> > ofproto/ofproto.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> >> > 3 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/ofproto/connmgr.c b/ofproto/connmgr.c
> >> > index a58e785..7a25828 100644
> >> > --- a/ofproto/connmgr.c
> >> > +++ b/ofproto/connmgr.c
> >> > @@ -1456,9 +1456,11 @@ static void schedule_packet_in(struct ofconn *,
> >> > struct ofproto_packet_in,
> >> > enum ofp_packet_in_reason wire_reason);
> >> >
> >> > /* Sends an OFPT_PORT_STATUS message with 'opp' and 'reason' to
> >> > appropriate
> >> > - * controllers managed by 'mgr'. */
> >> > + * controllers managed by 'mgr'. For messages caused by a controller
> >> > + * OFPT_PORT_MOD, specify 'source' as the controller connection that
> >> > sent the
> >> > + * request; otherwise, specify 'source' as NULL. */
> >> > void
> >> > -connmgr_send_port_status(struct connmgr *mgr,
> >> > +connmgr_send_port_status(struct connmgr *mgr, struct ofconn *source,
> >> > const struct ofputil_phy_port *pp, uint8_t
> >> > reason)
> >> > {
> >> > /* XXX Should limit the number of queued port status change
> >> > messages. */
> >> > @@ -1471,6 +1473,30 @@ connmgr_send_port_status(struct connmgr *mgr,
> >> > if (ofconn_receives_async_msg(ofconn, OAM_PORT_STATUS, reason))
> >> > {
> >> > struct ofpbuf *msg;
> >> >
> >> > + /* Before 1.3.4, OpenFlow specified that OFPT_PORT_MOD
> >> > should not
> >> > + * generate OFPT_PORT_STATUS messages. That requirement
> >> > was a
> >> > + * relic of how OpenFlow originally supported a single
> >> > controller,
> >> > + * so that one could expect the controller to already know
> >> > the
> >> > + * changes it had made.
> >> > + *
> >> > + * OpenFlow 1.3.4 and OpenFlow 1.5 changed OFPT_PORT_MOD to
> >> > send
> >> > + * OFPT_PORT_STATUS messages to every controller. This is
> >> > + * obviously more useful in the multi-controller case. We
> >> > could
> >> > + * always implement it that way in OVS, but that would risk
> >> > + * confusing controllers that are intended for
> >> > single-controller
> >> > + * use only. (Imagine a controller that generates an
> >> > + * OFPT_PORT_MOD in response to any OFPT_PORT_STATUS!)
> >> > + *
> >> > + * So this compromises: for OpenFlow 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2, it
> >> > + * generates OFPT_PORT_STATUS for OFPT_PORT_MOD, but not
> >> > back to
> >> > + * the originating controller. In a single-controller
> >> > environment,
> >> > + * in particular, this means that it will never generate
> >> > + * OFPT_PORT_STATUS for OFPT_PORT_MOD at all. */
> >> > + if (ofconn == source
> >> > + && rconn_get_version(ofconn->rconn) < OFP13_VERSION) {
> >> > + continue;
> >> > + }
> >> > +
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm not very familiar with the openflow specification, but I find that
> >> it says: "If the port config bits are changed by the switch through
> >> another administrative interface, the switch sends an OFPT_PORT_STATUS
> >> message to notify the controller of the change."in openflow-spec-1.1.0
> >> A.2.1. Did I misunderstand something?
> >
> > "another administrative interface" means "other than OpenFlow".
>
> All right, this patch is good to me.
> Thanks.
I'll apply this in a minute, thanks.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
