Hi Jarno, my reply inline. Thanks, Antonio
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jarno Rajahalme [mailto:ja...@ovn.org] > Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 11:05 PM > To: Fischetti, Antonio <antonio.fische...@intel.com> > Cc: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org>; dev@openvswitch.org > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH RFC] dpif-netdev: ACL+dpcls for > Wildcard matching. > > > > On Apr 22, 2016, at 1:21 AM, Fischetti, Antonio > <antonio.fische...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Ben, > > below are 2 examples. > > > > For both cases: > > * EMC was bypassed > > * using a bridge with 2 dpdk ports > > * I've sent data at line rate on one port and just read the > received rate on the other port, > > regardless of lost packets. > > > > > > Case A: 7 Flows > > ============ > > Original dpcls: 5.74 Mpps > > ACL + dpcls: 7.03 Mpps > > > > The 7 Flows were installed as: > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.20,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.19,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.18,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.17,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.16,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.15,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.14,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > > > > > Case B: 17 Flows > > ============= > > Original dpcls: 2.95 Mpps > > ACL+dpcls: 4.67 Mpps > > > > The 17 Flows were installed as: > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.20,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,acti > on=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.20,nw_dst=34.35.36.38,udp_ > dst=4369,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.19,udp_src=4369,action=out > put:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.18,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.17,udp_dst=4369,action=out > put:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.16,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.15,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.14,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.13,udp_src=4369,action=out > put:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.10,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.9,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.8,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.8,nw_dst=34.35.36.38,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.7,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.6,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_dst=34.35.36.38,action=output:2 > > > > For more details, please let me know. > > > > The flows above are at the OpenFlow level. I guess your test traffic > exercises (just) the corresponding datapath flows? > > Do you know how much of the performance gain is lost once you add > support not just for the IPv4 5-tuple, but all the different fields > supported by struct flow (metadata, L2, IPv6, ARP, IGMP, etc)? [Antonio F] I didn't make these kind of tests yet, for now I restricted my tests focusing only on the wildcard matching for megaflows. I tried to exclude any other aspect that could affect the overall performance, I wanted to check if this solution is really an improvement for the wildcard matching. When we consider that also other tables are involved, the lookups and jumps between ofproto tables, EMC lookups and so on, of course the performance gain will have less impact on the overall system. The performance figures are just for the IPv4 5-tuple, but I needed to share the idea and have some feedback from the Community before moving forward. > > Jarno > > > Thanks, > > Antonio > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:b...@ovn.org] > >> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 7:41 PM > >> To: Fischetti, Antonio <antonio.fische...@intel.com> > >> Cc: dev@openvswitch.org > >> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH RFC] dpif-netdev: ACL+dpcls for > Wildcard > >> matching. > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:45:09AM +0100, > antonio.fische...@intel.com > >> wrote: > >>> The purpose of this implementation is to improve the performance > >>> of wildcard matching in user-space. > >>> This RFC patch shows the basic functionality, some aspects were > not > >>> covered yet. > >>> > >>> I would like to get some feedback on whether people think > integrating > >>> the DPDK ACL table in this manner is potentially a good solution > or not. > >>> > >>> DPDK ACL tables show a better performance on lookup operations > than the > >>> Classifier. However their insertion time for new rules is > unacceptable. > >>> This solution attempts to combine the better performance of ACL > lookups > >>> with the lower insertion latency of the Classifier. > >> > >> How much does the performance improve? > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > dev@openvswitch.org > > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
