yes, maybe it is not a perfect resolution, but it did resolved this problem: when tapB deleted from ovs bridge, tapA's ingress rule disappeared and of course, there maybe some problem I haven't consider, so I want more detailed suggestions, thanks!
At 2015-08-20 13:03:53, "Ben Pfaff" <b...@nicira.com> wrote: >On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 11:29:07AM +0800, ychen wrote: >> port's ingress qdisc rule will automatically disappeared after >> the following steps: >> 1)use ip tuntap to create port tapA and tapB >> 2)set tapA and tapB to ingress qdisc with linux tc command >> 3)add tapA to ovs bridge >> 4)add tapB to the same ovs bridge(ingress rule disappear for tapA) >> ingress_policing_rate equals to 0 means disable ingress policing, >> so set flag VALID_POLICING only when this paramter is effective, >> and before send deleteing ingress qdisc message to kernel, first check >> whether need to do this action. if settings not changed or policing is not >> enabled with ingress_policing_rate equal to 0, do not send any message. >> when interface's MAC,MTU,link state changed, there will be a RTM_NETLINK >> message from kernel, and keep the flag VALID_POLICING as it is. > >I'm still not going to take this. As I said before, I don't see how >this solves the problem described in >http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/2015-May/017687.html. I don't >see much value in just tweaking the parameters of the problem. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
