I’ll rebase this for v3 anyway, but see the answers to the questions below:
> On Aug 29, 2016, at 4:57 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 04:31:37PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote: >> Use ofproto_flow_mod with a reference to an existing or new rule >> instead of ofputil_flow_mod for learn action execution from xlate >> cache >> >> Typically we would find that when a learn xlate cache entry is >> created, a preceding upcall has already created the learned flow. In >> this case the xlate cache entry takes a reference to that flow and >> keeps refreshing it without needing to perform any flow table lookups. >> This is both faster and shrinks the memory cost of each learn cache >> entry from ~3.5kb to about 0.3kb. >> >> If the learned rule does not yet exist, it is created and attached to >> the ofproto_flow_mod, from which it is then added. If the referred >> rule happens to expire and is removed from the classifier tables, we >> create a new rule using the old rule as a template, so that we can >> avoid storing the ofputil_flow_mod in all cases. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <ja...@ovn.org> > > xlate_learn_action() is the only user of learn_execute(). Would there > be any advantage in having learn_execute() provide its output in some > form other than struct ofputil_flow_mod? > No, since the ofproto_flow_mod_init() takes struct ofputil_flow_mod as an input anyway. > Should the log message from the failure case in xlate_learn_action() > report the actual error? > Added. > In the state == RULE_INITIALIZED case, ofproto_flow_mod_learn() does not > report any error it encounters to the caller (it has a hard-coded > "return 0;”) > In the state == RULE_INITIALIZED case, there's an inner "enum ofperr > error;" shadowing an outer one. > Both fixed for v3. Thanks for the review! > Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org <mailto:b...@ovn.org>> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
