Eelco Chaudron 于2022年11月24日周四 17:08写道：
>
>
> On 24 Nov 2022, at 10:04, Peng He wrote:
>
> > Eelco Chaudron 于2022年11月24日周四 16:34写道：
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 24 Nov 2022, at 1:46, Peng He wrote:
> >>
> >>> So do we need this patch (补丁) (补丁) or not??
> >>>
> >>> Guessing it's quite rare in the real pr
On 24 Nov 2022, at 10:04, Peng He wrote:
> Eelco Chaudron 于2022年11月24日周四 16:34写道：
>
>>
>>
>> On 24 Nov 2022, at 1:46, Peng He wrote:
>>
>>> So do we need this patch (补丁) or not??
>>>
>>> Guessing it's quite rare in the real production environment that we have
>>> two datapaths at the same time
Eelco Chaudron 于2022年11月24日周四 16:34写道：
>
>
> On 24 Nov 2022, at 1:46, Peng He wrote:
>
> > So do we need this patch (补丁) or not??
> >
> > Guessing it's quite rare in the real production environment that we have
> > two datapaths at the same time
> > And I am more (更多) curious that even thoug
On 24 Nov 2022, at 1:46, Peng He wrote:
> So do we need this patch or not??
>
> Guessing it's quite rare in the real production environment that we have
> two datapaths at the same time
> And I am more curious that even though we have 2 datapaths, should the port
> id be different? Is one
>
So do we need this patch or not??
Guessing it's quite rare in the real production environment that we have
two datapaths at the same time
And I am more curious that even though we have 2 datapaths, should the port
id be different? Is one
port capable of being assigned to 2 datapaths at the sa
On 19 Nov 2022, at 1:46, Peng He wrote:
> Eelco Chaudron 于2022年11月18日周五 15:38写道：
>
>>
>>
>> On 18 Nov 2022, at 2:57, Peng He wrote:
>>
>>> Since there are possible race conditions (between the kernel (内核)
>> datapath and
>>> userspace datapath),
>>> I guess this patch (补丁) is now needed again?
Eelco Chaudron 于2022年11月18日周五 15:38写道：
>
>
> On 18 Nov 2022, at 2:57, Peng He wrote:
>
> > Since there are possible race conditions (between the kernel (内核)
> datapath and
> > userspace datapath),
> > I guess this patch (补丁) is now needed again? But two datapath is really
> rare in
> > the real d
On 18 Nov 2022, at 2:57, Peng He wrote:
> Since there are possible race conditions (between the kernel datapath and
> userspace datapath),
> I guess this patch is now needed again? But two datapath is really rare in
> the real deployment.
> So I am not sure if we should pay attention here.
I st
Since there are possible race conditions (between the kernel datapath and
userspace datapath),
I guess this patch is now needed again? But two datapath is really rare in
the real deployment.
So I am not sure if we should pay attention here.
Eelco Chaudron 于2022年10月19日周三 18:50写道：
>
>
> On 10 Oct
On 10 Oct 2022, at 9:12, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> On 8 Oct 2022, at 5:27, Peng He wrote:
>
>> Hi，Eelco
>>
>> after a second thought, I think this patch is not needed neither,
>> the code here is trying to find a rule which cover the packet,
>> it does not mean the match and action of rule equals
On 8 Oct 2022, at 5:27, Peng He wrote:
> Hi，Eelco
>
> after a second thought, I think this patch is not needed neither,
> the code here is trying to find a rule which cover the packet,
> it does not mean the match and action of rule equals to the ones
> of the ukey.
>
> So the code here is just
Hi，Eelco
after a second thought, I think this patch is not needed neither,
the code here is trying to find a rule which cover the packet,
it does not mean the match and action of rule equals to the ones
of the ukey.
So the code here is just a prevention, no need to make it consistent
with ukey.
When PMDs perform upcalls, the newly generated ukey will replace
the old, however, the newly generated mageflow will be discard
to reuse the old one without checking if the actions of new and
old are equal.
This code prevents in case someone runs dpctl/add-flow to add
a dp flow with inconsistent a
13 matches
Mail list logo
