Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH net-next v2] net: openvswitch: allow providing upcall pid for the 'execute' command

[Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>]

Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org> writes:

> When a packet enters OVS datapath and there is no flow to handle it,
> packet goes to userspace through a MISS upcall.  With per-CPU upcall
> dispatch mechanism, we're using the current CPU id to select the
> Netlink PID on which to send this packet.  This allows us to send
> packets from the same traffic flow through the same handler.
>
> The handler will process the packet, install required flow into the
> kernel and re-inject the original packet via OVS_PACKET_CMD_EXECUTE.
>
> While handling OVS_PACKET_CMD_EXECUTE, however, we may hit a
> recirculation action that will pass the (likely modified) packet
> through the flow lookup again.  And if the flow is not found, the
> packet will be sent to userspace again through another MISS upcall.
>
> However, the handler thread in userspace is likely running on a
> different CPU core, and the OVS_PACKET_CMD_EXECUTE request is handled
> in the syscall context of that thread.  So, when the time comes to
> send the packet through another upcall, the per-CPU dispatch will
> choose a different Netlink PID, and this packet will end up processed
> by a different handler thread on a different CPU.
>
> The process continues as long as there are new recirculations, each
> time the packet goes to a different handler thread before it is sent
> out of the OVS datapath to the destination port.  In real setups the
> number of recirculations can go up to 4 or 5, sometimes more.
>
> There is always a chance to re-order packets while processing upcalls,
> because userspace will first install the flow and then re-inject the
> original packet.  So, there is a race window when the flow is already
> installed and the second packet can match it and be forwarded to the
> destination before the first packet is re-injected.  But the fact that
> packets are going through multiple upcalls handled by different
> userspace threads makes the reordering noticeably more likely, because
> we not only have a race between the kernel and a userspace handler
> (which is hard to avoid), but also between multiple userspace handlers.
>
> For example, let's assume that 10 packets got enqueued through a MISS
> upcall for handler-1, it will start processing them, will install the
> flow into the kernel and start re-injecting packets back, from where
> they will go through another MISS to handler-2.  Handler-2 will install
> the flow into the kernel and start re-injecting the packets, while
> handler-1 continues to re-inject the last of the 10 packets, they will
> hit the flow installed by handler-2 and be forwarded without going to
> the handler-2, while handler-2 still re-injects the first of these 10
> packets.  Given multiple recirculations and misses, these 10 packets
> may end up completely mixed up on the output from the datapath.
>
> Let's allow userspace to specify on which Netlink PID the packets
> should be upcalled while processing OVS_PACKET_CMD_EXECUTE.
> This makes it possible to ensure that all the packets are processed
> by the same handler thread in the userspace even with them being
> upcalled multiple times in the process.  Packets will remain in order
> since they will be enqueued to the same socket and re-injected in the
> same order.  This doesn't eliminate re-ordering as stated above, since
> we still have a race between kernel and the userspace thread, but it
> allows to eliminate races between multiple userspace threads.
>
> Userspace knows the PID of the socket on which the original upcall is
> received, so there is no need to send it up from the kernel.
>
> Solution requires storing the value somewhere for the duration of the
> packet processing.  There are two potential places for this: our skb
> extension or the per-CPU storage.  It's not clear which is better,
> so just following currently used scheme of storing this kind of things
> along the skb.  We still have a decent amount of space in the cb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org>
> ---
>

Thanks Ilya - explanation is very clear.

Acked-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>