On 2020-06-11 1:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> From: Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]>
>
> When ports were removed from bridge, we should flush the
> offload rules on the ports. The main reason is two factors:
>
> * The ports removed from bridge, will be managed by OvS, so
> flush the rules which installed by OvS.
> * If using the TC flower offload, for example, tc rules still
> are on the ports. And the information still are maintained by
> OvS, such as the mapping for tc and ufid.
> Then if adding the port to bridge and installing the rules
> to it again, *del_filter_and_ufid_mapping will be invoked,
> and delete the tc rule using tc handle which may not exist
> (offload init api flushed them.) on kernel or is used by other
> previous rules (if so, that rules will be deleted that is not
> we expected.).
>
> Cc: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
> Cc: Paul Blakey <[email protected]>
> Cc: Roi Dayan <[email protected]>
> Cc: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]>
> Cc: William Tu <[email protected]>
> Cc: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]>
> Tested-at:
> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftravis-ci.com%2Fgithub%2Fovn-open-virtual-networks%2Fovs%2Fbuilds%2F170832624&data=02%7C01%7Croid%40mellanox.com%7Cf0bc38aa88074693105108d80df36979%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637274686378147436&sdata=Dlq4jnSclj0vXQoldO7Oq2Wwx%2BGEHjK%2FftPUDHnJcKM%3D&reserved=0
> Co-authored-by: Wengang Hou <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]>
> ---
> lib/netdev-offload.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/netdev-offload.c b/lib/netdev-offload.c
> index ab97a292ebac..964566caab1e 100644
> --- a/lib/netdev-offload.c
> +++ b/lib/netdev-offload.c
> @@ -593,6 +593,7 @@ netdev_ports_remove(odp_port_t port_no, const struct
> dpif_class *dpif_class)
> data = netdev_ports_lookup(port_no, dpif_class);
> if (data) {
> dpif_port_destroy(&data->dpif_port);
> + netdev_flow_flush(data->netdev); /* flush offloaded rules. */
> netdev_close(data->netdev); /* unref and possibly close */
> hmap_remove(&port_to_netdev, &data->portno_node);
> hmap_remove(&ifindex_to_port, &data->ifindex_node);
>
it looks ok but I wonder if it's redundant?
I tested and when I removed a port with tc rules on it,
all tc rules got deleted using the flow api flow del,
we get into netdev_tc_flow_del() for each flow.
So you shouldn't have a tc rule left or ufid mapping.
How did you test that you saw tc rules were still on the port?
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
