lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [25]   [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 -try2
    Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 02:40:43PM CET, dada1@cosmosbay.com wrote:
    >Jiri Pirko a écrit :
    >> (resend)
    >>
    >> Hi all.
    >>
    >> 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.
    >>
    >> This patch solves the situation in the bonding without touching bridge code,
    >> as Patrick suggested. For every incoming frame to bonding it searches the
    >> destination address in slaves list and if any of slave addresses matches, it
    >> rewrites the address in frame by the adress of bonding master. This ensures that
    >> all frames comming thru the bonding in alb mode have the same address.
    >>
    >> Jirka
    >>
    >>
    >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@redhat.com>
    >>
    >> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
    >> index 27fb7f5..2838be0 100644
    >> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
    >> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
    >> @@ -1762,6 +1762,26 @@ int bond_alb_set_mac_address(struct net_device *bond_dev, void *addr)
    >> return 0;
    >> }
    >>
    >> +void bond_alb_change_dest(struct sk_buff *skb)
    >> +{
    >> + struct net_device *bond_dev = skb->dev;
    >> + struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
    >> + unsigned char *dest = eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest;
    >> + struct slave *slave;
    >> + int i;
    >> +
    >> + if (!memcmp(dest, bond_dev->dev_addr, ETH_ALEN))
    >> + return;
    >> + read_lock(&bond->lock);
    >
    >
    >Its a pity bonding doesnt use RCU and needs this read_lock(&bond->lock)

    Sure it is...
    >
    >
    >> + bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, i) {
    >> + if (!memcmp(slave->dev->dev_addr, dest, ETH_ALEN)) {
    >
    >compare_ether_addr() (or even better compare_ether_addr_64bits()) instead of memcmp() ?

    Okay, I'll use compare_ether_addr_64bits and do the repost later on...
    >
    >> + memcpy(dest, bond_dev->dev_addr, ETH_ALEN);
    >> + break;
    >> + }
    >> + }
    >> + read_unlock(&bond->lock);
    >> +}
    >> +
    >
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-25 15:45    [W:0.029 / U:148.764 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site