value is now 80% of policing rate to make sure
TCP works correctly.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Angel Ajo
Tested-by: Miguel Angel Ajo
---
FAQ.md | 2 +-
lib/netdev-linux.c | 14 --
vswitchd/vswitch.xml | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff
Did you recompile/install openvswitch with debug info and
provided the path to the executable file via the gdb file
command as gdb is suggesting?
The breakpoint is pending because gdb cannot map the function name
to the code address space until it's able to read the debug info for vswitchd.
op
Otherwise the built vtep-ctl is not available from the
sandbox command line.
---
tutorial/ovs-sandbox | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tutorial/ovs-sandbox b/tutorial/ovs-sandbox
index c8fc32f..5e0553b 100755
--- a/tutorial/ovs-sandbox
+++ b/tutorial/ovs-sandbox
Sorry for the duplicate, I got a rejection on first one from the server,
but somehow
is on the mail list archive now that I look.
and I guess I'm missing a Signed-off-my: Miguel Angel Ajo
right?
majop...@redhat.com wrote:
From: Miguel Angel Ajo
Otherwise the built vtep-ctl i
Hi!,
Russell Bryant wrote:
On 01/13/2016 11:30 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 01/11/2016 08:19 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 07:33:16PM +0530, bscha...@redhat.com wrote:
This patch series enables QOS support in OVN. Only two parameters
(policing_rate and policing_burst) are enab
Good catch :)
Ben Pfaff wrote:
OVSDB is transactional but it does not have built-in protection from dirty
reads. To avoid those, it's necessary to manually add verification to
transactions to ensure that any data reads whose values were essential to
later writes have not changed. ovn-controller
Egress from the VM/port point of view, or from the switch point of view?.
Btw, Justin, I follow up with the question :) , is it possible to use the qos table to do
"egress" from the VM/port point of view?, I only managed to do that with the
ingress policing [1], is there any way to use queues f
Justin Pettit wrote:
On Sep 14, 2015, at 12:57 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo wrote:
Egress from the VM/port point of view, or from the switch point of view?.
I work on the switch, so it's always from its point of view. :-)
I was more used to the other point of view :), which brings me a l
eck was to determine if the Python version was >=
>> 2.6. We now only support >= 2.7, so this check would always be true.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Russell Bryant
>
> Acked-by: Ben Pfaff
Acked-by: Miguel Angel Ajo
___
de
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Ian Stokes wrote:
> This patch provides the modifications required in netdev-dpdk.c and
> vswitch.xml to enable ingress policing for DPDK interfaces.
>
> This patch implements the necessary netdev functions to netdev-dpdk.c as
> well as various helper functions req
Hi,
Ben, Babu, what you're proposing here makes sense, it's aligned with the
plans we were shaping for min-bandwidth guarantees in the openvswitch-agent
[1] [2]
I wasn't aware of the possibility of setting a queue on the external
interface, and reference that from set_queue (I need to unde
Hi Ben,
I think slawe is not worried about the 1000 vs 1024 difference.
But on the fact that when setting 1000kbit burst on an policy,
when you check via tc cmdline, you see 1000kbyte.
Is TC command line reporting it wrong?, is it TC API?, or is it a
bug in OVS?.
I'm reading the
t*1024
If somebody could doublecheck, that'd be great.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
>I think slawe is not worried about the 1000 vs 1024 difference.
>
>But on the fact that when setting 1000kbit burst on an policy,
>
I will send it today.
Best,
Miguel Angel
El 12/4/2016 20:33, "Ben Pfaff" escribió:
> Would you like to submit a fix?
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 01:34:28PM +0200, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:
> > After looking at iproute2/tc sources and ovs sources, I believe the
&g
re in-host.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Miguel Angel Ajo wrote:
> The tc_police structure was filled with a value calculated in bits
> instead of bytes while bytes were expected. This led the setting
> of an x8 higher burst value.
>
> Documentation and defaults have bee
Can you resend it?
>
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:49:28PM +0200, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:
>> I verified the 10% / 80% changes with netperf, it's unable to sustain 10Mbps
>> without at least a 8Mbit burst. I've seen recommendations from cisco to use
>> policin
______________
> dev mailing list
> dev@openvswitch.org
> http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
Miguel Angel Ajo
___
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
17 matches
Mail list logo
