On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Jiri Benc [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:14:10 -0700, Yi-Hung Wei wrote:

quoted

ovs_flow_key_update() is called when the flow key is invalid, and it is
used to update and revalidate the flow key. Commit 329f45bc4f19
("openvswitch: add mac_proto field to the flow key") introduces mac_proto
field to flow key and use it to determine whether the flow key is valid.
However, the commit does not update the code path in ovs_flow_key_update()
to revalidate the flow key which may cause BUG_ON() on execute_recirc().
This patch addresses the aforementioned issue.

Good catch.

quoted

 int ovs_flow_key_update(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sw_flow_key *key)
 {
+     int res;
+
+     res = key_extract_mac_proto(skb);
+     if (res < 0)
+             return res;
+     key->mac_proto = res;
+
      return key_extract(skb, key);
 }

But this should just reset the SW_FLOW_KEY_INVALID flag, there's no
need to recompute mac_proto.

Something like this:

 int ovs_flow_key_update(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sw_flow_key *key)
 {
-       return key_extract(skb, key);
+       int res;
+
+       res = key_extract(skb, key);
+       if (!res)
+               key->mac_proto &= ~SW_FLOW_KEY_INVALID;
+       return res;
 }

Hi Jiri,

One case that I worry is that key_extract() currently relies on mac_proto to
decide whether to process the link layer.  So if we update key->mac_proto
after key_extract(), wouldn't we run into a problem like the following?

If we invalidate a flow key of a L3 packet, the flow's mac_proto is like this
(MAC_PROTO_NONE | SW_FLOW_KEY_INVALID), then key_extract() will
process the link layer of this L3 packet since mac_proto !=MAC_PROTO_NONE?

In this case, shall we update key_extract() like this
static int key_extract(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sw_flow_key *key)

        /* Link layer. */
        clear_vlan(key);
-       if (key->mac_proto == MAC_PROTO_NONE) {
+       if (key->mac_proto & MAC_PROTO_NONE) {
                if (unlikely(eth_type_vlan(skb->protocol)))
                        return -EINVAL;

Thanks,

-Yi-Hung

Thanks,

 Jiri