On 02/06/2017 23:08, Flavio Leitner wrote:
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 02:59:56PM +0300, Roi Dayan wrote:
From: Paul Blakey <pa...@mellanox.com>
Using the new netdev flow api operate will now try and
offload flows to the relevant netdev of the input port.
Other operate methods flows will come in later patches.
[...]
diff --git a/lib/dpif-netlink.c b/lib/dpif-netlink.c
index 6f36b5e..8438e71 100644
--- a/lib/dpif-netlink.c
+++ b/lib/dpif-netlink.c
[...]
static void
-dpif_netlink_operate(struct dpif *dpif_, struct dpif_op **ops, size_t n_ops)
+dbg_print_flow(const struct nlattr *key, size_t key_len,
+ const struct nlattr *mask, size_t mask_len,
+ const struct nlattr *actions, size_t actions_len,
+ const ovs_u128 *ufid,
+ const char *op)
+{
perhaps:
if (VLOG_IS_DBG_ENABLED()) {
+ struct ds s;
+
+ ds_init(&s);
+ ds_put_cstr(&s, op);
+ ds_put_cstr(&s, " (");
+ odp_format_ufid(ufid, &s);
+ ds_put_cstr(&s, ")");
+ if (key_len) {
+ ds_put_cstr(&s, "\nflow (verbose): ");
+ odp_flow_format(key, key_len, mask, mask_len, NULL, &s, true);
+ ds_put_cstr(&s, "\nflow: ");
+ odp_flow_format(key, key_len, mask, mask_len, NULL, &s, false);
+ }
+ ds_put_cstr(&s, "\nactions: ");
+ format_odp_actions(&s, actions, actions_len);
+ VLOG_DBG("\n%s", ds_cstr(&s));
+ ds_destroy(&s);
}
to avoid those operations on every flow put?
or maybe on the caller to avoid the function call.
right. maybe not an important change? in a later commit we remove
this function and refactor log_flow_put_message() from dpif.c and
use that. "dpif-netlink: Use dpif logging functions"
+}
+
+static int
+try_send_to_netdev(struct dpif_netlink *dpif, struct dpif_op *op)
{
- struct dpif_netlink *dpif = dpif_netlink_cast(dpif_);
+ int err = EOPNOTSUPP;
+ switch (op->type) {
+ case DPIF_OP_FLOW_PUT: {
+ struct dpif_flow_put *put = &op->u.flow_put;
+
+ if (!put->ufid) {
+ break;
+ }
+ dbg_print_flow(put->key, put->key_len, put->mask, put->mask_len,
+ put->actions, put->actions_len, put->ufid,
+ (put->flags & DPIF_FP_MODIFY ? "PUT(MODIFY)" : "PUT"));
+ err = parse_flow_put(dpif, put);
+ break;
+ }
+ case DPIF_OP_FLOW_DEL:
+ case DPIF_OP_FLOW_GET:
+ case DPIF_OP_EXECUTE:
+ default:
+ break;
+ }
+
+ return err;
+}
+
+static void
+dpif_netlink_operate_chunks(struct dpif_netlink *dpif, struct dpif_op **ops,
+ size_t n_ops)
+{
while (n_ops > 0) {
size_t chunk = dpif_netlink_operate__(dpif, ops, n_ops);
+
ops += chunk;
n_ops -= chunk;
}
}
+static void
+dpif_netlink_operate(struct dpif *dpif_, struct dpif_op **ops, size_t n_ops)
+{
+ struct dpif_netlink *dpif = dpif_netlink_cast(dpif_);
+ struct dpif_op *new_ops[OPERATE_MAX_OPS];
+ int count = 0;
+ int i = 0;
+ int err = 0;
+
+ if (netdev_is_flow_api_enabled()) {
+ while (n_ops > 0) {
+ count = 0;
+
+ while (n_ops > 0 && count < OPERATE_MAX_OPS) {
+ struct dpif_op *op = ops[i++];
+
+ err = try_send_to_netdev(dpif, op);
+ if (err && err != EEXIST) {
+ new_ops[count++] = op;
+ } else {
+ op->error = err;
+ }
+
+ n_ops--;
+ }
+
+ dpif_netlink_operate_chunks(dpif, new_ops, count);
+ }
+
+ return;
+ }
+
+ dpif_netlink_operate_chunks(dpif, ops, n_ops);
+}
+
The above could be:
if (netdev_is_flow_api_enabled()) {
...
} else {
dpif_netlink_operate_chunks(dpif, ops, n_ops);
}
return;
}
Otherwise the patch looks good to me.
ok
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
