On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 01:43:08PM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > <snip patch contents> > > > > +Optimizing Specific Subtable Search > > > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > + > > > +The DPCLS wildcarding engine can be "specialized" to handle specific > > > subtable > > > +searching even faster than the generic subtable search > > > implementation.Not all > > > +subtable searches are specialized, if you see a message like the > > > following in > > > +your OVS output, please run the below commands to inform OVS community > > of the > > > > The documentation is supposed to help users to understand what is > > happening and perhaps consider the next steps. The text above > > requires deeper knowledge of how OVS internally works and provides > > no indication of what is causing it or consequences like if it is > > harmful or not. Also, it commits to add new specialized lookups > > in the next release, which might not be realistic. > > > > What do you think about the suggestion below based on your proposal? > > > > ----8<--- > > During the packet classification, the datapath can use specialized > > lookup tables to optimize the search. However, not all situations > > are optimized. If you see a message like the following one in the OVS > > logs, it means that there is no specialized implementation available > > for the current networking traffic. In this case, OVS will continue > > to process the traffic normally using a more generic lookup table." > > > > "Using non-specialized AVX512 lookup for subtable (4,1) and possibly > > others." > > > > (Note that the numbers 4 and 1 will likely be different in your logs) > > > > Additional specialized lookups can be added to OVS if the user > > provides that log message along with the command output as show > > below to the OVS mailing list. Note that the numbers in the log > > message ("subtable (X,Y)") need to match with the numbers in > > the provided command output ("dp-extra-info:miniflow_bits(X,Y)"). > > > > "ovs-appctl dpctl/dump-flows -m", which results in output like this: > > > > ufid:82770b5d-ca38-44ff-8283-74ba36bd1ca5, > > skb_priority(0/0),skb_mark(0/0) > > ,ct_state(0/0),ct_zone(0/0),ct_mark(0/0),ct_label(0/0),recirc_id(0), > > > > dp_hash(0/0),in_port(pcap0),packet_type(ns=0,id=0),eth(src=00:00:00:00:00: > > 00/00:00:00:00:00:00,dst=ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff/00:00:00:00:00:00),eth_type( > > > > 0x8100),vlan(vid=1,pcp=0),encap(eth_type(0x0800),ipv4(src=127.0.0.1/0.0.0.0 > > > > ,dst=127.0.0.1/0.0.0.0,proto=17/0,tos=0/0,ttl=64/0,frag=no),udp(src=53/0, > > dst=53/0)), packets:77072681, bytes:3545343326, used:0.000s, dp:ovs, > > actions:vhostuserclient0, dp-extra-info:miniflow_bits(4,1) > > > > ----8<--- > > Good suggestion, I guess I'm too close to the code to even be able describe or > document it from a users point of view! > > I like the suggested changes, thanks. Respin or update-on-apply all fine with > me. -Harry
Due to this busy patching period, could you please respin? It helps maintainers, the 0day bot can do usual checking, etc. -- fbl _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev