On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:09:26AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 11:03:46AM CEST, simon.hor...@netronome.com wrote:
> >On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 10:09:13AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> >>On 08/23/2014 07:51 AM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> >>>On 08/23/14 at 11:24am, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >>>>Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:53:34AM CEST, sfel...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On Aug 22, 2014, at 12:39 PM, John Fastabend <john.fastab...@gmail.com> 
> >>>>>wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >>>>>>- Also there is no programmatic way to learn which flows are
> >>>>>>   in hardware and which in software. There is a pr_warn but
> >>>>>>   that doesn't help when interacting with the hardware remotely.
> >>>>>>   I need some mechanism to dump the set of hardware tables and
> >>>>>>   the set of software tables.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Agreed, we need a way to annotate which flows are installed hardware.
> >>>>
> >>>>Yes, we discussed that already. We need to make OVS daemon hw-offload
> >>>>aware indicating which flow it want/prefers to be offloaded. This is I
> >>>>believe easily extentable feature and can be added whenever the right
> >>>>time is.
> >>>
> >>>I think the swdev flow API is good as-is. The bitmask specyfing the
> >>>offload preference with all the granularity (offload-or-fail,
> >>>try-to-offload, never-offload) needed can be added later, either in
> >>>OVS only or in swdev itself.
> >>>
> >>>What is unclear in this patch is how OVS user space can know which
> >>>flows are offloaded and which aren't. A status field would help here
> >>>which indicates either: flow inserted and offloaded, flow inserted but
> >>>not offloaded. Given that, the API consumer can easily keep track of
> >>>which flows are currently offloaded.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Right. I think this is basically what Jiri and I discussed when he
> >>originally posted the series. For my use cases this is one of the
> >>more interesting pieces. If no one else is looking at it I can try
> >>it on some of the already existing open source drivers that have some
> >>very simple support for ingress flow tables read flow director.
> >
> >While I agree that it would be good to have such controls I'd like
> >to take a small step back as I'm not entirely clear how flow deletion
> >works in the current code. I am specifically refering to the Open vSwitch
> >use-case.
> >
> >My assumption is that if a flow is offloaded then once it is set up in
> >hardware packets won't hit the datapath any more.  However, statistics need
> >to be updated in the datapath for active flows otherwise they will be
> >evicted by ovs-vswtichd.
> 
> Yes, that is exactly what happens.
> 
> >
> >In short, I was expecting to see get and statistics callbacks.
> 
> We plan to implement this in rocker device as one of next steps.

Great. Will that also include some swdev API and datapath modifications?
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to