On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Loftus, Ciara <ciara.lof...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have been validating the userspace tunneling patches for DPDK and have > encountered some problems. > > My set-up is as follows: > > > 192.168.1.1/24 192.168.1.2/24 > +------------------------+ > +------------------------+ > | br1 | | > br1 | > +------------------------+ > +------------------------+ > | vxlan1 | | > vxlan1 | > +------------------------+ > +------------------------+ > | tap1 (192.168.1.10) | | tap1(192.168.1.20) | > +------------------------+ > +------------------------+ > | | > | | > | | > | | > 172.168.1.1/24 172.168.1.2/24 > +--------------+ +-----------+ > | br0 | | br0 > | > +--------------+ +-----------+ > | dpdk0 |----------------------| dpdk0 | > +--------------+ +-----------+ > > Host A Host B > > > > The dpdk devices have been connected back to back and the tap devices are > used by VMs on either host. > > The main issue I am encountering is the vswitchd appears to be crashing and I > am unable to root cause the issue. One circumstance where the daemon crashes > is if VTEP A is pinged from Host B and vice versa. There have been many other > instances where the vswitchd crashes however I have been unable to trace the > cause. > Secondly, the route added by tnl/route/add seems to silently disappear a > couple of seconds after first adding it, as seen in tnl/route/show. However, > once it's re-added, it appears to remain. >
Thanks for validating the patch. RFC patch was not well tested against DPDK, I am going to post next version of patch, you can try that. --Pravin. > Kind Regards, > Ciara > > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@openvswitch.org] On Behalf Of Jarno Rajahalme > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 1:10 AM > To: Pravin Shelar > Cc: dev@openvswitch.org > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH RFC 2/2] openvswitch: Userspace tunneling. > > On Oct 13, 2014, at 2:32 PM, Pravin Shelar <pshe...@nicira.com> wrote: > >>>> + case OVS_ACTION_ATTR_TUNNEL_PUSH: >>>> + if (*depth < MAX_RECIRC_DEPTH) { >>>> + struct dpif_packet *tnl_pkt[NETDEV_MAX_RX_BATCH]; >>>> + int err; >>>> + >>>> + if (may_steal) { >>>> + dp_netdev_clone_pkt_batch(tnl_pkt, packets, cnt); >>>> + packets = tnl_pkt; >>>> + } >>> >>> Should this be the reverse? Clone if can NOT take the packets? >> right, >> >>>> + >>>> + err = odp_push_tunnel_action(dp, a, packets, cnt); >>>> + if (err) { >>>> + dp_netdev_drop_packets(tnl_pkt, cnt, may_steal); >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + (*depth)++; >>>> + dp_netdev_input(pmd, packets, cnt); >>>> + (*depth)--; >>>> + return; >>>> + } >>> >>> Should “break” here. >> packets are already consumed so we can not break here. >> > > Do you really intend to fall through to the TUNNEL_POP case? > > Jarno > >>>> + >>>> + case OVS_ACTION_ATTR_TUNNEL_POP: >>>> + if (*depth >= MAX_RECIRC_DEPTH) { >>>> + break; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + p = > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@openvswitch.org > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Intel Shannon Limited > Registered in Ireland > Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare > Registered Number: 308263 > Business address: Dromore House, East Park, Shannon, Co. Clare > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the > sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others > is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact > the sender and delete all copies. > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
