lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] bonding: allow bond in mode balance-alb to work properly in bridge
Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 06:39:32AM CET, shemminger@linux-foundation.org wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:33:04 +0100
>Jiri Pirko <jpirko@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all.
>>
>> This is only a draft of patch to consult. I'm aware that it should be divided
>> into multiple patches. I want to know opinion from you folks.
>>
>> The problem is described in following bugzilla:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487763
>>
>> Basically here's what's going on. In every mode, bonding interface uses the same
>> mac address for all enslaved devices. Except for mode balance-alb. When you put
>> this kind of bond device into a bridge it will only add one of mac adresses into
>> a hash list of mac addresses, say X. This mac address is marked as local. But
>> this bonding interface also has mac address Y. Now then packet arrives with
>> destination address Y, this address is not marked as local and the packed looks
>> like it needs to be forwarded. This packet is then lost which is wrong.
>>
>> Notice that interfaces can be added and removed from bond while it is in bridge.
>> Therefore I introduce another function pointer in struct net_device_ops -
>> ndo_check_mac_address. This function when it's implemented should check passed
>> mac address against the one set in device. I'm using this in bonding driver when
>> the bond is in mode balance-alb to walk thru all slaves and checking if any of
>> them equals passed address.
>>
>> Then in bridge function br_handle_frame_finish() I'm using ndo_check_mac_address
>> to recognize the destination mac address as local.
>>
>> Please look at this and tell me what you think about it.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jirka
>>
>
>A better and more general way to do this have the dev_set_mac_address
>function check the return of the notifier and unwind. Then any protocol
>can easily prevent address from changing.

Can you please describe this thougth a bit more? I can't understand it now...

Thanks

Jirka


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-14 10:53    [W:0.326 / U:2.152 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site