From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jay Vosburgh Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] bonding: notify when bonding device address changes Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:28:24 -0700 Message-ID: <11728.1302895704@death> References: <20110415184407.550abd88@pomiocik.lan> <4DA89114.9040900@gmail.com> <10227.1302893590@death> <20110415121054.73717900@nehalam> Cc: =?UTF-8?B?Tmljb2xhcyBkZSBQZXNsb8O8YW4=?= , =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= , netdev@vger.kernel.org, roy@marples.name, Andy Gospodarek To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]:34420 "EHLO e4.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752924Ab1DOT23 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:28:29 -0400 Received: from d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (d01relay01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.233]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p3FJ8MwI009288 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:08:22 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p3FJSRZ5339364 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:28:27 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p3FJSQFc031849 for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 16:28:27 -0300 In-reply-to: <20110415121054.73717900@nehalam> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Stephen Hemminger wrote: >When a device changes its hardware address, it needs to call the network >device notifiers to inform protocols. > >Compile tested only. We'll need to test this, I think. If I'm not mistaken, I believe that inetdev_event will issue gratuitous ARPs when it gets the NETDEV_CHANGEADDR, and we need to make sure those are correct for all cases. >Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > >--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c 2011-04-15 11:21:02.142866195 -0700 >+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c 2011-04-15 11:28:06.491408825 -0700 >@@ -967,9 +967,11 @@ static void bond_do_fail_over_mac(struct > > switch (bond->params.fail_over_mac) { > case BOND_FOM_ACTIVE: >- if (new_active) >+ if (new_active) { > memcpy(bond->dev->dev_addr, new_active->dev->dev_addr, > new_active->dev->addr_len); >+ call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEADDR, bond->dev); >+ } > break; > case BOND_FOM_FOLLOW: > /* >@@ -1386,6 +1388,7 @@ static int bond_sethwaddr(struct net_dev > pr_debug("slave_dev=%p\n", slave_dev); > pr_debug("slave_dev->addr_len=%d\n", slave_dev->addr_len); > memcpy(bond_dev->dev_addr, slave_dev->dev_addr, slave_dev->addr_len); >+ call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEADDR, bond_dev); > return 0; > } > >@@ -1644,10 +1647,11 @@ int bond_enslave(struct net_device *bond > > /* If this is the first slave, then we need to set the master's hardware > * address to be the same as the slave's. */ >- if (is_zero_ether_addr(bond->dev->dev_addr)) >+ if (is_zero_ether_addr(bond->dev->dev_addr)) { > memcpy(bond->dev->dev_addr, slave_dev->dev_addr, > slave_dev->addr_len); >- >+ call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEADDR, bond->dev); >+ } > > new_slave = kzalloc(sizeof(struct slave), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!new_slave) { >@@ -2067,6 +2071,7 @@ int bond_release(struct net_device *bond > * to the mac address of the first slave > */ > memset(bond_dev->dev_addr, 0, bond_dev->addr_len); >+ call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEADDR, bond_dev); This one in particular I'm not sure about; should the system send a gratuitous ARP for a MAC address of all zeroes? > if (!bond->vlgrp) { > bond_dev->features |= NETIF_F_VLAN_CHALLENGED; >@@ -2252,6 +2257,7 @@ static int bond_release_all(struct net_d > * first slave > */ > memset(bond_dev->dev_addr, 0, bond_dev->addr_len); >+ call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEADDR, bond_dev); Same comment for this one. > if (!bond->vlgrp) { > bond_dev->features |= NETIF_F_VLAN_CHALLENGED; -J --- -Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com