From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [PATCH] igbvf: avoid name clash between PF and VF Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:44:39 +0100 Message-ID: <1277894679.28819.60.camel@localhost> References: <4C2B0614.9040004@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev , e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Duyck, Alexander H" , gregory.v.rose@intel.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, Andy Gospodarek To: Stefan Assmann Return-path: Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:53572 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752367Ab0F3Koo (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2010 06:44:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C2B0614.9040004@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 10:53 +0200, Stefan Assmann wrote: > From: Stefan Assmann > > It looks like the VFs get initialized before all the PFs are. Therefore > the udev mapping MAC <-> ethX (for PFs) gets screwed because the VFs > may grab the ethX interface names (reserved by udev) for the PFs. > > Example: > igb max_vfs=0 > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:9E > eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:9F > eth2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:A0 > eth3 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:A1 > igb max_vfs=1 > eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:9E > eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 0A:CF:41:69:F7:A9 > eth2 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 3A:FE:20:4C:2A:3B > eth3 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr C6:C3:B1:56:C9:A4 > eth3_rename Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:9F > eth4 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 6E:8A:8A:A3:5F:69 > eth4_rename Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:A0 > eth5_rename Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:13:20:F7:A5:A1 > > In the example above VF 0A:CF:41:69:F7:A9 grabs eth1 but udev > has a rule that says eth1 should be assigned PF 00:13:20:F7:A5:9F > (eth3_rename) and waits for the VF to disappear to rename eth3_rename > to eth1. Unfortunately eth1 is not going to disappear. > This is not a udev bug since udev doesn't create persistent rules for > VFs as their MAC address changes every reboot. [...] I think it is a bug in the udev rules: udev should rename the VFs even though their names won't be persistent. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.