From: Simon Arlott <simon@fire.lp0.eu>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
jesse@nicira.com, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>
Subject: Re: 2.6.37 regression: adding main interface to a bridge breaks vlan interface RX
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:17:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D3487C2.7060506@simon.arlott.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295280044.6264.5.camel@bwh-desktop>
On 17/01/11 16:00, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 14:09 +0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
>> [ 1.666706] forcedeth 0000:00:08.0: ifname eth0, PHY OUI 0x5043 @ 16, addr 00:e0:81:4d:2b:ec
>> [ 1.666767] forcedeth 0000:00:08.0: highdma csum vlan pwrctl mgmt gbit lnktim msi desc-v3
>>
>> I have eth0 and eth0.3840 which works until I add eth0 to a bridge.
>> While eth0 is in a bridge (the bridge device is up), eth0.3840 is unable
>> to receive packets. Using tcpdump on eth0 shows the packets being
>> received with a VLAN tag but they don't appear on eth0.3840. They appear
>> with the VLAN tag on the bridge interface.
> [...]
>
> This means the behaviour is now consistent, whether or not hardware VLAN
> tag stripping is enabled. (I previously pointed out the inconsistent
> behaviour in <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/149864>.) I
> would consider this an improvement.
Shouldn't the kernel also prevent a device from being both part of a
bridge and having VLANs? Instead everything appears to work except
incoming traffic.
--
Simon Arlott
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Simon Arlott <simon@fire.lp0.eu>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
jesse@nicira.com, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: 2.6.37 regression: adding main interface to a bridge breaks vlan interface RX
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:17:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D3487C2.7060506@simon.arlott.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295280044.6264.5.camel@bwh-desktop>
On 17/01/11 16:00, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 14:09 +0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
>> [ 1.666706] forcedeth 0000:00:08.0: ifname eth0, PHY OUI 0x5043 @ 16, addr 00:e0:81:4d:2b:ec
>> [ 1.666767] forcedeth 0000:00:08.0: highdma csum vlan pwrctl mgmt gbit lnktim msi desc-v3
>>
>> I have eth0 and eth0.3840 which works until I add eth0 to a bridge.
>> While eth0 is in a bridge (the bridge device is up), eth0.3840 is unable
>> to receive packets. Using tcpdump on eth0 shows the packets being
>> received with a VLAN tag but they don't appear on eth0.3840. They appear
>> with the VLAN tag on the bridge interface.
> [...]
>
> This means the behaviour is now consistent, whether or not hardware VLAN
> tag stripping is enabled. (I previously pointed out the inconsistent
> behaviour in <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/149864>.) I
> would consider this an improvement.
Shouldn't the kernel also prevent a device from being both part of a
bridge and having VLANs? Instead everything appears to work except
incoming traffic.
--
Simon Arlott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-17 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-16 14:09 2.6.37 regression: adding main interface to a bridge breaks vlan interface RX Simon Arlott
2011-01-17 16:00 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-01-17 16:00 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-01-17 18:17 ` Simon Arlott [this message]
2011-01-17 18:17 ` Simon Arlott
2011-01-19 16:26 ` Jesse Gross
2011-01-19 16:26 ` Jesse Gross
2011-01-23 17:45 ` Maciej Rutecki
2011-01-23 21:29 ` Jesse Gross
2011-01-24 15:25 ` Maciej Rutecki
2011-02-05 15:34 ` chriss
2011-02-06 18:09 ` Jesse Gross
2011-02-06 19:37 ` chriss
2011-02-07 12:09 ` Nicolas de Pesloüan
2011-02-14 13:22 ` chriss
2011-02-23 1:35 ` Jesse Gross
2011-02-25 22:57 ` Jesse Gross
2011-02-26 0:16 ` chriss
2011-02-26 1:08 ` Jesse Gross
2011-02-26 11:51 ` chriss
2011-02-28 21:37 ` Jesse Gross
2011-03-01 10:16 ` Francois Romieu
2011-03-01 20:04 ` Jesse Gross
2011-03-01 21:52 ` Francois Romieu
2011-03-04 19:32 ` chriss
2011-03-04 22:41 ` Francois Romieu
2011-03-05 10:53 ` chriss
2011-02-08 2:24 ` Jesse Gross
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D3487C2.7060506@simon.arlott.org.uk \
--to=simon@fire.lp0.eu \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au \
--cc=jesse@nicira.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.