From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Bohac Subject: Re: PATCH: fix bridged 802.3ad bonding Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 12:13:20 +0200 Message-ID: <20080605101319.GA3756@midget.suse.cz> References: <20080603132106.GA3256@midget.suse.cz> <20080603094604.6a7dfe7d@extreme> <20080603193227.GA4050@midget.suse.cz> <20080603131326.1f70915e@extreme> <18105.1212528128@death> <20080603215519.298c0cd3@extreme> <20080604082425.GA3272@midget.suse.cz> <20080604090633.2a12cecc@extreme> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jiri Bohac , Jay Vosburgh , netdev@vger.kernel.org, David Miller To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from styx.suse.cz ([82.119.242.94]:51050 "EHLO mail.suse.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753989AbYFEKNV (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jun 2008 06:13:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080604090633.2a12cecc@extreme> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 09:06:33AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 10:24:25 +0200 > Jiri Bohac wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 09:55:19PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > > > > --- a/net/bridge/br_input.c 2008-06-03 21:44:54.000000000 -0700 > > > +++ b/net/bridge/br_input.c 2008-06-03 21:52:20.000000000 -0700 > > > @@ -135,15 +135,12 @@ struct sk_buff *br_handle_frame(struct n > > > /* Pause frames shouldn't be passed up by driver anyway */ > > > if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_PAUSE)) > > > goto drop; > > > - > > > - /* Process STP BPDU's through normal netif_receive_skb() path */ > > > - if (p->br->stp_enabled != BR_NO_STP) { > > > - if (NF_HOOK(PF_BRIDGE, NF_BR_LOCAL_IN, skb, skb->dev, > > > - NULL, br_handle_local_finish)) > > > - return NULL; > > > - else > > > - return skb; > > > - } > > > + > > > + if (NF_HOOK(PF_BRIDGE, NF_BR_LOCAL_IN, skb, skb->dev, > > > + NULL, br_handle_local_finish)) > > > + return NULL; /* frame consumed by filter */ > > > + else > > > + return skb; /* continue processing */ > > > } > > > > > > switch (p->state) { > > > > where did the "if (p->br->stp_enabled != BR_NO_STP)" condition > > go? Is it not needed? I thought it was there to prevent the STP > > BPDUs from being handled when STP is turned off. > > > > That is already done in br_stp_rcv so the check here was not > needed. Ah, I see. So can we get one of the patches in? I still think that running the LACP frames through the bridging NF hooks does not make sense, but it's your call. -- Jiri Bohac SUSE Labs, SUSE CZ