Re: [net-next PATCH v4 0/8] Managing the forwarding database(FDB)

[John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>]

On 5/4/2012 1:34 PM, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com <mailto:sri@us.ibm.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 5/3/2012 12:38 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> 
>         On 5/2/2012 4:36 PM, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
> 
>             On 5/2/2012 2:52 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> 
>                 On 5/2/2012 8:08 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> 
>                     On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 01:06:37PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> 
>                         From: John Fastabend<john.r.fastabend@__intel.com <mailto:john.r.fastabend@intel.com>>
>                         Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 09:43:51 -0700
> 
>                             The following series is a submission for net-next to allow
>                             embedded switches and other stacked devices other then the
>                             Linux bridge to manage a forwarding database.
> 
>                             Previously discussed here,
> 
>                             http://lists.openwall.net/__netdev/2012/03/19/26 <http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2012/03/19/26>
> 
>                             v4: propagate return codes correctly for ndo_dflt_Fdb_dump()
> 
>                             v3: resolve the macvlan patch 8/8 to fix a dev_set_promiscuity()
>                                  error and add the flags field to change and get link routines.
> 
>                             v2: addressed feedback from Ben Hutchings resolving a typo in the
>                                  multicast add/del routines and improving the error handling
>                                  when both NTF_SELF and NTF_MASTER are set.
> 
>                             I've tested this with 'br' tool published by Stephen Hemminger
>                             soon to be renamed 'bridge' I believe and various traffic
>                             generators mostly pktgen, ping, and netperf.
> 
>                         All applied, if we need any more tweaks we can just add them
>                         on top of this work.
> 
>                         Thanks John.
> 
>                     John, do you plan to update kvm userspace to use this interface?
> 
>                 No immediate plans. I would really appreciate it if you or one
>                 of the IBM developers working in this space took it on. Of course
>                 if no one steps up I guess I can eventually get at it but it will
>                 be sometime. For now I've been doing this manually with the bridge
>                 tool yet to be published.
> 
> 
>             Does this mean that when we add an interface to a bridge, it need not be put in promiscuous mode and
>             add/delete fdb entries dynamically?
> 
>         The net/bridge will automatically put the interface in promisc mode
>         when the device is attached. We do need to add/delete fdb entries
>         though to allow forwarding packets from the virtual function and
>         any emulated devices e.g. tap devices on the bridge.
> 
> 
>     Consider the following scenario where we have a SR-IOV NIC with 1 PF
>     and 2 VFs (VF1 & VF2).
>     - eth0 is the PF which is attached to bridge br0 and connected to 2 VMs VM1 and VM2.
>     - eth1 is the VF1 terminated on the host and assigned to VM3 via macvtap0 in passthru mode.
>     - VF2 is directly assigned to VM4 via pci-device assignment.
> 
>      VM1      VM2         VM3           VM4
>     (mac1)  (mac2)     (mac3)         (mac4)
>      |        |           |             |
>      |        |           |             |
>     vnet0   vnet1         |             |
>      |        |           |             |
>      \        /           |             |
>      \      /            |             |
>        br0            macvtap0         |
>         |              (mac3)          |
>         |                |             |
>        eth0            eth1            |
>         |              (mac3)          |
>         |               |              |
>       ------------------------------__------
>      | PF              VF1           VF2  |
>      |                                    |
>      |                 VEB                |
>      ------------------------------__------
> 
>     In this setup, i think when VM1 and VM2 come up, mac1 and mac2 have to be added to the
>     embedded bridge's fdb.  Once we add these 2 entries, all the 4 VMs can talk to each other.
>     Is this correct?
> 

Correct as Roopa indicated.

>     Now, if VM1 or VM2 wants to add secondary mac addresses, i think we need qemu to add a new fdb
>     entry when it receives add mac address command via virtio control vq.
> 
> 
> yes. I had used (with some tweaks) some existing qemu patches on patchwork to try this out with my implementation.
> 
> The links to the patches on patchwork are listed in my cover mail at http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=131534911001054&w=2 <http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=131534911001054&w=2>
> 
>  
> 
>     Can we add multiple mac addresses to VFs? For example VM3 and VM4 trying to add a secondary mac address.

Yes this is why we also added the fdb interface to the macvlan device as well.

> 
>     What about VMs trying to create VLANs? I think this will work on VM1 and VM2. However with VM3
>     and VM4, i think we need qemu to add vlans to the VFs when the VMs create them.
> 
> 
> yes for vlans too, the qemu patches pointed out above can be reused.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roopa
>  
>