On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 08:47:45PM -0700, Andy Zhou wrote: >> When available, use datapath 'clone' for patch port translation. >> Clone provides a stronger guarantee that packet will be restored >> after going through a patch port, Even in case the packet is >> NAT'd by the bridge behind the patch port. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andy Zhou <az...@ovn.org> > > Thanks for working on this. It is good to improve the correctness of > the datapath implementation of OpenFlow actions, and this is the weakest > point in correctness that I currently know about. > > This approach seems correct, but expensive in the common case where the > packet does not need to be restored, since "clone" and "sample" are > expensive datapath actions: I expect that they are more expensive than a > few "set field" actions, and certainly more expensive than doing > nothing. I think that there are only a few datapath actions that make > changes that later datapath actions can't restore. Can the code here > check whether any of those actions are actually used, and avoid using > "clone" or "sample" in the common case?
Make sense. I will work on implementing this and repost. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
