The FDP team is no longer accepting new bugs in Bugzilla. Please report your issues under FDP project in Jira. Thanks.
Bug 1896993 - ipv6 RS flooding: ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler70)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit
Summary: ipv6 RS flooding: ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler70)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1887333
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Fast Datapath
Classification: Red Hat
Component: ovn2.13
Version: FDP 20.I
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: OVN Team
QA Contact: Jianlin Shi
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-11-12 01:39 UTC by Jianlin Shi
Modified: 2023-10-05 15:46 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-10-05 15:46:32 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker FD-950 0 None None None 2021-11-19 14:42:38 UTC

Description Jianlin Shi 2020-11-12 01:39:30 UTC
Description of problem:
ipv6 RS flooding: ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler70)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
ovn2.13.0-20.09.0-10

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1894478#c5

Actual results:
[root@wsfd-advnetlab19 ~]# grep 4096 /var/log/openvswitch/ovs-vswitchd.log                            
2020-11-11T10:13:39.047Z|00001|ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler70)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit actions on bridge br-int while processing icmp6,in_port=2,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:00:00:00:01,dl_dst=33:33:00:00:00:02,ipv6_src=fe80::200:ff:fe00:1,ipv6_dst=ff02::2,ipv6_label=0x00000,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=255,icmp_type=133,icmp_code=0
2020-11-11T10:13:40.068Z|00001|ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler56)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit actions on bridge br-int while processing icmp6,in_port=LOCAL,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:00:00:00:01,dl_dst=33:33:00:00:00:02,ipv6_src=fe80::c50:caff:feed:5840,ipv6_dst=ff02::2,ipv6_label=0x00000,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=255,icmp_type=133,icmp_code=0

Expected results:
no WARN for ipv6 RS

Additional info:

Comment 1 Mark Michelson 2021-11-19 14:41:59 UTC
Hi, we're trying to prioritize older issues. This is reported against an old version of ovn2.13. I have a couple of questions: does this still happen with current ovn2.13? Does this still happen with current ovn-2021?

Comment 2 Jianlin Shi 2021-11-22 03:40:21 UTC
(In reply to Mark Michelson from comment #1)
> Hi, we're trying to prioritize older issues. This is reported against an old
> version of ovn2.13. I have a couple of questions: does this still happen
> with current ovn2.13? Does this still happen with current ovn-2021?

the issue still exist on the latest ovn-2021 version: ovn-2021-21.09.1-20:

+ grep 4096 /var/log/openvswitch/ovs-vswitchd.log
2021-11-22T03:37:43.290Z|00001|ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler3)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit actions on bridge br-int while processing icmp6,in_port=1,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:00:00:00:01,dl_dst=33:33:00:00:00:02,ipv6_src=fe80::200:ff:fe00:1,ipv6_dst=ff02::2,ipv6_label=0x00000,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=255,icmp_type=133,icmp_code=0
2021-11-22T03:37:44.812Z|00001|ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler4)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit actions on bridge br-int while processing icmp6,in_port=LOCAL,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:00:00:00:01,dl_dst=33:33:00:00:00:02,ipv6_src=fe80::e820:e7ff:fe17:a442,ipv6_dst=ff02::2,ipv6_label=0x00000,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=255,icmp_type=133,icmp_code=0
2021-11-22T03:38:15.031Z|00002|ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler3)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit actions on bridge br-int while processing icmp6,in_port=1,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:00:00:00:01,dl_dst=33:33:00:00:00:02,ipv6_src=fe80::200:ff:fe00:1,ipv6_dst=ff02::2,ipv6_label=0x00000,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=255,icmp_type=133,icmp_code=0
2021-11-22T03:38:21.675Z|00001|ofproto_dpif_xlate(handler5)|WARN|over 4096 resubmit actions on bridge br-int while processing icmp6,in_port=LOCAL,vlan_tci=0x0000,dl_src=00:00:00:00:00:01,dl_dst=33:33:00:00:00:02,ipv6_src=fe80::e820:e7ff:fe17:a442,ipv6_dst=ff02::2,ipv6_label=0x00000,nw_tos=0,nw_ecn=0,nw_ttl=255,icmp_type=133,icmp_code=0
[root@dell-per740-12 bz1896993]# rpm -qa | grep -E "openvswitch2.15|ovn-2021"
python3-openvswitch2.15-2.15.0-53.el8fdp.x86_64
ovn-2021-21.09.1-20.el8fdp.x86_64
openvswitch2.15-2.15.0-53.el8fdp.x86_64
ovn-2021-central-21.09.1-20.el8fdp.x86_64
ovn-2021-host-21.09.1-20.el8fdp.x86_64

Comment 3 Mark Michelson 2022-10-10 18:14:26 UTC
This issue came up during our OVN meeting today. As far as we understand, this issue is likely still present in OVN. RS packets are still broadcast to all connected routers from a logical switch. This is likely what results in the resubmit limit being hit. We should be handling RS packets the same as ARP and ND packets: target them to the owning router of an address instead of doing a broadcast.

@jishi, the linked reproducer in comment 1 does not actually have the list of OVN commands that were used to cause this issue. Can you please provide those? Thank you.

Comment 4 Jianlin Shi 2022-10-10 23:57:06 UTC
(In reply to Mark Michelson from comment #3)
> This issue came up during our OVN meeting today. As far as we understand,
> this issue is likely still present in OVN. RS packets are still broadcast to
> all connected routers from a logical switch. This is likely what results in
> the resubmit limit being hit. We should be handling RS packets the same as
> ARP and ND packets: target them to the owning router of an address instead
> of doing a broadcast.
> 
> @jishi, the linked reproducer in comment 1 does not actually have
> the list of OVN commands that were used to cause this issue. Can you please
> provide those? Thank you.

the reproducer is listed in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1894048#c7

Comment 5 Mark Michelson 2023-10-05 15:46:32 UTC
I'm closing this as a duplicate of 1887333. This is a case where the issue causing this behavior is understood, and we just need to perform the correct actions to actually fix it.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1887333 ***


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.