Re: [PATCH net-next v13 5/5] openvswitch: Add support for unique flow IDs.

[Joe Stringer]

On 21 January 2015 at 15:41, Pravin Shelar <pshelar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Joe Stringer <joestringer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 21 January 2015 at 10:31, Pravin Shelar <pshelar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Joe Stringer <joestringer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Previously, flows were manipulated by userspace specifying a full,
>>>> unmasked flow key. This adds significant burden onto flow
>>>> serialization/deserialization, particularly when dumping flows.
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds an alternative way to refer to flows using a
>>>> variable-length "unique flow identifier" (UFID). At flow setup time,
>>>> userspace may specify a UFID for a flow, which is stored with the flow
>>>> and inserted into a separate table for lookup, in addition to the
>>>> standard flow table. Flows created using a UFID must be fetched or
>>>> deleted using the UFID.
>>>>
>>>> All flow dump operations may now be made more terse with OVS_UFID_F_*
>>>> flags. For example, the OVS_UFID_F_OMIT_KEY flag allows responses to
>>>> omit the flow key from a datapath operation if the flow has a
>>>> corresponding UFID. This significantly reduces the time spent assembling
>>>> and transacting netlink messages. With all OVS_UFID_F_OMIT_* flags
>>>> enabled, the datapath only returns the UFID and statistics for each flow
>>>> during flow dump, increasing ovs-vswitchd revalidator performance by 40%
>>>> or more.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer <joestringer@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Its almost ready. But I saw minor issues,
>>> few checkpatch.pl failures.
>>> in ovs_flow_cmd_new() we should use unmasked key to lookup in flow
>>> table for legacy case.
>>
>> Thanks for review, I can send out a fresh version soon. Should I
>> resend the whole series or is just a new version of this patch
>> sufficient?
>
> I think you have to send entire series. Dave will not apply series
> patches from different versions.

Thanks. I also realized there were checkpatch issues in the first
patch, so I resent the whole series anyway.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/