From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:04:11 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn Message-ID: <20100220180411.GA15286@lunn.ch> References: <20100123174616.GA4795@Sellars> <20100126061311.GA12697@Sellars> <20100129082545.GI7844@lunn.ch> <201001291659.59677.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> <20100130165059.GV24649@lunn.ch> <20100211094659.GH2900@lunn.ch> <20100211100156.GI2900@lunn.ch> <20100219171905.GA17836@Linus-Debian> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100219171905.GA17836@Linus-Debian> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] slowpath warning Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 06:19:05PM +0100, Linus L??ssing wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Sorry, didn't have the time to try your patch any earlier, I'm > right in the middle of my exams :). Hi Linus Marek told me. No problems. I remember what its like studying for exams. However, it is nice to sometimes take a break and do something totally different. > Your patch already looks quite good, I couldn't reproduce any > memory leaks or crashes here (tried that with three routers and 1 > or 2 vis servers activated, also activating/deactivating them a > lot, no problems with that). And yes, the slow-path warning has > gone with your patch. Great. So we are on the right tracks. > However, I'm having some weird output when connecting two routers > over wifi _and_ over ethernet cable. The setup: > > Before plugging in the cable: > r1-ath1 <-- wifi --> r2-ath1 > ------------ > root@OpenWrt:~# batctl vd dot > digraph { > "r1-ath1" -> "r2-ath1" [label="1.32"] > "r1-ath1" -> "r1-hna" [label="HNA"] > "r1-ath1" -> "5a:2e:1e:1f:64:6b" [label="HNA"] > subgraph "cluster_r1-ath1" { > "r1-ath1" [peripheries=2] > } > "r2-ath1" -> "r1-ath1" [label="1.11"] > "r2-ath1" -> "r2-hna" [label="HNA"] > "r2-ath1" -> "82:31:95:f9:14:6f" [label="HNA"] > subgraph "cluster_r2-ath1" { > "r2-ath1" [peripheries=2] > } > } > ------------ > After plugging in the cable: > r1-ath1 <-- wifi --> r2-ath1 + > r1-eth0.3 <-- cable --> r2-eth0.3 > ------------ > root@OpenWrt:~# batctl vd dot > digraph { > "r1-ath1" -> "r2-ath1" [label="1.0"] > "r1-ath1" -> "r2-eth0.3" [label="1.66"] > "r1-ath1" -> "r1-hna" [label="HNA"] > "r1-ath1" -> "5a:2e:1e:1f:64:6b" [label="HNA"] > subgraph "cluster_r1-ath1" { > "r1-ath1" [peripheries=2] > "r1-eth0.3" > } > subgraph "cluster_r1-ath1" { > "r1-ath1" [peripheries=2] > } > "r2-ath1" -> "r1-ath1" [label="1.0"] > "r2-ath1" -> "r1-eth0.3" [label="1.15"] > "r2-ath1" -> "r2-hna" [label="HNA"] > "r2-ath1" -> "82:31:95:f9:14:6f" [label="HNA"] > subgraph "cluster_r2-ath1" { > "r2-ath1" [peripheries=2] > "r2-eth0.3" > } > subgraph "cluster_r2-ath1" { > "r2-ath1" [peripheries=2] > } > } > root@OpenWrt:~# cat /proc/net/batman-adv/vis_data > 06:22:b0:98:87:dd,TQ 04:22:b0:98:87:fa 251, HNA 00:22:b0:98:87:dd, HNA 5a:2e:1e:1f:64:6b, PRIMARY, SEC 04:22:b0:98:87:de, > 06:22:b0:98:87:f9,TQ 06:22:b0:98:87:dd 255, TQ 04:22:b0:98:87:de 251, HNA 00:22:b0:98:87:f9, HNA 82:31:95:f9:14:6f, SEC 04:22:b0:98:87:fa, PRIMARY, Actually, this vis_data to does not map to the dot above! There are the wrong number of HNA, wrong order etc. Here is what i think your bat-host file contains: 06:22:b0:98:87:dd r1-ath1 06:22:b0:98:87:f9 r2-ath1 00:22:b0:98:87:dd r1-hna 04:22:b0:98:87:de r1-eth0.3 00:22:b0:98:87:f9 r2-hna 04:22:b0:98:87:fa r2-eth0.3 and this is what i get, assuming i got the MAC->name mapping correct: digraph { "r1-ath1" -> "r2-eth0.3" [label="1.15"] "r1-ath1" -> "r1-hna" [label="HNA"] "r1-ath1" -> "5a:2e:1e:1f:64:6b" [label="HNA"] subgraph "cluster_r1-ath1" { "r1-ath1" [peripheries=2] } subgraph "cluster_r1-ath1" { "r1-ath1" [peripheries=2] "r1-eth0.3" } "r2-ath1" -> "r1-ath1" [label="1.0"] "r2-ath1" -> "r1-eth0.3" [label="1.15"] "r2-ath1" -> "r2-hna" [label="HNA"] "r2-ath1" -> "82:31:95:f9:14:6f" [label="HNA"] subgraph "cluster_r2-ath1" { "r2-ath1" [peripheries=2] "r2-eth0.3" } subgraph "cluster_r2-ath1" { "r2-ath1" [peripheries=2] } } batctl parses top-to-bottom, left-to-right. It does not consolidate the PRIMARY and the SECONDARY into one cluster. It leaves DOT to do that. Hence there are two cluster statements for each cluster actually drawn. > So the second 'subgraph "cluster_r1-ath1"' is obviously > unnecessary. Yes, unnecessary, but makes the batctl code easier. Also "r1-ath1" -> "r2-eth0.3" looks wrong, should be > "r1-eth0.3" -> "r2-eth0.3" instead (and the same with r2 a few > lines later). These comments i agree with. A wireless and a wired device should not be neighbours. We don't have any records which originate from the secondary MAC address. That is guess is the major problem here. So, did my/Mareks patch break it, or was it broken before? First i suggest you go back to just before Simon's patch which introduced receiving using skbufs: http://open-mesh.org/changeset/1517 That will tell us if we need to go back further, or our patch broke it. If you need to go back further, i would suggest just before: http://open-mesh.org/changeset/1510 However, if it is our patch then we can chop the patch into two: Use Mareks patch: https://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n/2010-January/002261.html and Index: vis.c =================================================================== --- vis.c (revision 1575) +++ vis.c (working copy) @@ -444,10 +444,15 @@ memcpy(info->packet.target_orig, orig_node->orig, ETH_ALEN); +spin_unlock_irqrestore(&orig_hash_lock, flags); + send_raw_packet((unsigned char *) &info->packet, packet_length, orig_node->batman_if, orig_node->router->addr); + +spin_lock_irqsave(&orig_hash_lock, flags); + } } memcpy(info->packet.target_orig, broadcastAddr, ETH_ALEN); This adds a race condition, which i hope if O.K. for debugging purposes, but i hope allows the send to happen without the slowpath errors. If so, we can test Marek's part of the patch. I'm on vacation for a week now. I will have Internet access some time, but not much. Have fun debugging. Andrew