Hi Andy, I built a test package with your previous patch to Joe, but we need to schedule an appropriate time to test it, so it's a bit slow on that front.
Having said that, which patch do you think is better to try first? Thanks, fbl On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 04:36:20PM -0700, Andy Zhou wrote: > Hi, Joe, > > This is potentially a better fix that I'd like to propose for the > 'net' tree. It would be great if you can test it in your set up to > see if it solved the issue you are facing with. > > Thanks, > > andy > > diff --git a/datapath/actions.c b/datapath/actions.c > index c529bbb..208eb30 100644 > --- a/datapath/actions.c > +++ b/datapath/actions.c > @@ -1003,11 +1003,11 @@ int ovs_execute_actions(struct datapath *dp, > struct sk_buff *skb, > err = do_execute_actions(dp, skb, key, > acts->actions, acts->actions_len); > > - if (!level) > - process_deferred_actions(dp); > - > this_cpu_dec(exec_actions_level); > > + if (level <= 1) > + process_deferred_actions(dp); > + > /* This return status currently does not reflect the errors > * encounted during deferred actions execution. Probably needs to > * be fixed in the future. > > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:55 PM, Andy Zhou <az...@nicira.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Joe Talerico <jtale...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> When using balance-tcp bonding with OVS we were seeing ARP issues when we > >> reached ~ 100 guests. I Tracked as much as possible here : > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1267291 > >> > >> Has anyone seen this behavior before? > >> > >> Switching to active/backup resolves the issue. > > > > Thanks for reporting the issue with lots of relevant information. I > > have not seen this issue before. > > One the error messages in the bugzilla report suggested that you may > > ran into the deferred action fifo limit. > > > > Would you please try to increase its size with the following patch, > > and report back how much it helped. This changes OVS kernel module, so > > you will have to recompile the kernel module. > > > > This is not like the right fix, but should help to confirm if there > > are any other issues in the way to get your set up working. > > > > diff --git a/datapath/actions.c b/datapath/actions.c > > index c529bbb..a4afecb 100644 > > --- a/datapath/actions.c > > +++ b/datapath/actions.c > > @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ struct deferred_action { > > struct sw_flow_key pkt_key; > > }; > > > > -#define DEFERRED_ACTION_FIFO_SIZE 10 > > +#define DEFERRED_ACTION_FIFO_SIZE 100 > > struct action_fifo { > > int head; > > int tail; > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
