Re: Deliver skbs to intermediate interfaces, when using cascaded rx-handlers

[Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@waldekranz.com>]

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 02:10:35PM -0300, Flavio Leitner wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:01:58AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> > I have a system with the following configuration:
> > 
> >    * eth0 is a regular Ethernet MAC, connected to a hardware switch.
> >    * port[1-4] are the in-kernel representation of the switch.
> >    * team0 is a regular team-interface which bonds port1 and port2.
> > 
> >       +-------+
> >       | team0 |
> >       +---+---+
> >           |
> >      +----+----+
> >      |         |
> >  +---+---+ +---+---+ +-------+ +-------+
> >  | port1 | | port2 | | port3 | | port4 | 
> >  +---+---+ +---+---+ +---+---+ +---+---+
> >      |         |         |         |
> >      +---------+----+----+---------+
> >                     |
> >                 +---+---+
> >                 | eth0  |
> >                 +-------+
> > 
> > Both the switch and the team driver attaches rx-handlers to their
> > lower layers. The problem is that team expects LACP frames that
> > are intercepted by team0, to also be delivered to the port interface
> > by __netif_receive_skb_core (in the final iteration of the registered
> > protocols). However in this case, when two rx-handlers are cascaded,
> > the skb will be delivered to eth0, since that is the original device
> > (orig_dev).
> 
> Indeed. It is not possible to update orig_dev, so it is stuck
> on eth0 regardless of all the stacked interfaces.
> 
> > There are a few ways this can be solved as far as i can see:
> > 
> >    1. Introduce a new rx-handler return code that specifies that
> >    skb->dev has been altered, like RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER, and that we
> >    also want to change orig_dev to this new device.
> 
> But then you need to know which rx-handler will run next, because
> the orig_dev might still be implicit wanted.

The next rx-handler is resolved by looking at skb->dev->rx_handler, so
that shouldn't be a problem. Or am I missing something?

>  
> >    2. Change the switch driver to return RX_HANDLER_CONSUMED and then
> >    queue the skb all over again, though I am afraid that this will eat
> >    some cycles.
> 
> Before queue again, you need to update skb->dev, right? This seems
> similar to (1).

Exactly. It is very similar. The difference is that I would have to
call netif_rx and go through a lot of code again, instead of taking
the fast path via the another_round-loop in __netif_receive_skb_core.

> 
> >    3. Keep track of all traversed interfaces and change the final
> >    protocol iteration to deliver the skb to all intermediate devices.
> 
> That's what I thought too.

Ok, so if I provide such a patch, you think it would have a good
chance of getting accepted?

What are the performance implications of deliver_skb-ing the packet to
each intermediate layer? Considering that most of those packets will
probably not be of interest to anyone.

> 
> fbl

-- 
Thanks
 - wkz