From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9810AC433EF for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:13:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1349190AbiC3ROq (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Mar 2022 13:14:46 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35292 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S244733AbiC3ROp (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Mar 2022 13:14:45 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82C8559392; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EF74B81D6E; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:12:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4EAF6C340EC; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:12:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1648660377; bh=NIslaD6hR1K1hA7T5NIGktk7gAw8SD895+5pJcEGgq0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=dQ1LDkKRmaafeVvWPpJTSn+pFHzwoYqAt2Wmvqu6sDtftkrF2t/MbhU+mN1l6IhP+ I+lGp2xSM8UPqHBDfy1fbINTv4SYhA0Jx4hxe+jfFyyD12kKRZ5yC+uLvxzgn72huS znvN6VEsDUHpVMPnPKbfhvOSlatJHmtARI/0AML0g7nWN6RMBQLyckUXqHLP8c3yKX DQ0udvf17rUYDmWiXmPGY+sBAIwB/uwk0lEvyYnNg031j+V8iNEwZtsEVv/JhF5iJv EWAZIhh3h3vTZQYY+vgEI1od2OetFelV0j3RpvZ7ltUc2v7W8aAXV5QZcRZI194YFf j6sQAp2gDdlwg== Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:12:56 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Nikolay Aleksandrov Cc: Alexandra Winter , "David S. Miller" , Paolo Abeni , Hangbin Liu , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , Roopa Prabhu , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ido Schimmel , Jiri Pirko , Jay Vosburgh Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] veth: Support bonding events Message-ID: <20220330101256.53f6ef48@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20220329114052.237572-1-wintera@linux.ibm.com> <20220329175421.4a6325d9@kernel.org> <20220330085154.34440715@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 19:16:42 +0300 Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: > > Maybe opt-out? But assuming the event is only generated on > > active/backup switch over - when would it be okay to ignore > > the notification? > > Let me just clarify, so I'm sure I've not misunderstood you. Do you mean opt-out as in > make it default on? IMO that would be a problem, large scale setups would suddenly > start propagating it to upper devices which would cause a lot of unnecessary bcast. > I meant enable it only if needed, and only on specific ports (second part is not > necessary, could be global, I think it's ok either way). I don't think any setup > which has many upper vlans/macvlans would ever enable this. That may be. I don't have a good understanding of scenarios in which GARP is required and where it's not :) Goes without saying but the default should follow the more common scenario. > >> My concern was about the Hangbin's alternative proposal to notify all > >> bridge ports. I hope in my porposal I was able to avoid infinite loops. > > > > Possibly I'm confused as to where the notification for bridge master > > gets sent.. > > IIUC it bypasses the bridge and sends a notify peers for the veth peer so it would > generate a grat arp (inetdev_event -> NETDEV_NOTIFY_PEERS). Ack, I was basically repeating the question of where does the notification with dev == br get generated. There is a protection in this patch to make sure the other end of the veth is not plugged into a bridge (i.e. is not a bridge port) but there can be a macvlan on top of that veth that is part of a bridge, so IIUC that check is either insufficient or unnecessary.