From: Jay Vosburgh <jv@jvosburgh.net>
To: "Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean)" <sforshee@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@kernel.org>,
Tonghao Zhang <tonghao@bamaicloud.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: don't force LACPDU tx to ~333 ms boundaries
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 09:30:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2545704.1750869056@famine> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250625-fix-lacpdu-jitter-v1-1-4d0ee627e1ba@kernel.org>
Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean) <sforshee@kernel.org> wrote:
>The timer which ensures that no more than 3 LACPDUs are transmitted in
>a second rearms itself every 333ms regardless of whether an LACPDU is
>transmitted when the timer expires. This causes LACPDU tx to be delayed
>until the next expiration of the timer, which effectively aligns LACPDUs
>to ~333ms boundaries. This results in a variable amount of jitter in the
>timing of periodic LACPDUs.
To be clear, the "3 per second" limitation that all of this
should to conform to is from IEEE 802.1AX-2014, 6.4.16 Transmit machine:
"When the LACP_Enabled variable is TRUE and the NTT (6.4.7)
variable is TRUE, the Transmit machine shall ensure that a
properly formatted LACPDU (6.4.2) is transmitted [i.e., issue a
CtrlMuxN:M_UNITDATA.Request(LACPDU) service primitive], subject
to the restriction that no more than three LACPDUs may be
transmitted in any Fast_Periodic_Time interval. If NTT is set to
TRUE when this limit is in force, the transmission shall be
delayed until such a time as the restriction is no longer in
force. The NTT variable shall be set to FALSE when the Transmit
machine has transmitted a LACPDU."
The current implementation conforms to this as you describe: by
aligning transmission to 1/3 second boundaries, no more than 3 can ever
be sent in one second.
If, hypothetically, the state machine were to transition, or a
user updates port settings (either of which would set NTT each time)
more than 3 times in a second, would your patched code obey this
restriction?
For completeness, and to make this email as complicated as
possible, I'll note that 802.1AX-2020 removes this particular
restriction in favor of incorporating the 802.3 generic limit on
transmission rates for Slow Protocols (of which LACP is one) to 10 per
second (802.3-2022, 30.3.1.1.38) into the state machine (802.1AX-2020,
6.4.7, see "txOpportunity" and 6.4.14 LACP Transmit machine). Linux
bonding doesn't implement the 802.1AX-2020 state machines, though, so I
don't think we can reasonably pick and choose arbitrary pieces from two
differing editions of a standard.
-J
>Change this to only rearm the timer when an LACPDU is actually sent,
>allowing tx at any point after the timer has expired.
>
>Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean) <sforshee@kernel.org>
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
>index c6807e473ab706afed9560bcdb5e6eca1934f5b7..a8d8aaa169fc09d7d5c201ff298b37b3f11a7ded 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
>@@ -1378,7 +1378,7 @@ static void ad_tx_machine(struct port *port)
> /* check if tx timer expired, to verify that we do not send more than
> * 3 packets per second
> */
>- if (port->sm_tx_timer_counter && !(--port->sm_tx_timer_counter)) {
>+ if (!port->sm_tx_timer_counter || !(--port->sm_tx_timer_counter)) {
> /* check if there is something to send */
> if (port->ntt && (port->sm_vars & AD_PORT_LACP_ENABLED)) {
> __update_lacpdu_from_port(port);
>@@ -1393,12 +1393,13 @@ static void ad_tx_machine(struct port *port)
> * again until demanded
> */
> port->ntt = false;
>+
>+ /* restart tx timer(to verify that we will not
>+ * exceed AD_MAX_TX_IN_SECOND
>+ */
>+ port->sm_tx_timer_counter = ad_ticks_per_sec / AD_MAX_TX_IN_SECOND;
> }
> }
>- /* restart tx timer(to verify that we will not exceed
>- * AD_MAX_TX_IN_SECOND
>- */
>- port->sm_tx_timer_counter = ad_ticks_per_sec/AD_MAX_TX_IN_SECOND;
> }
> }
>
>
>---
>base-commit: 86731a2a651e58953fc949573895f2fa6d456841
>change-id: 20250625-fix-lacpdu-jitter-1554d9f600ab
>
>Best regards,
>--
>Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean) <sforshee@kernel.org>
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jv@jvosburgh.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-25 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-25 16:01 [PATCH] bonding: don't force LACPDU tx to ~333 ms boundaries Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean)
2025-06-25 16:13 ` Carlos Bilbao
2025-06-25 16:30 ` Jay Vosburgh [this message]
2025-06-25 17:00 ` Seth Forshee (DigitalOcean)
2025-07-01 8:10 ` Paolo Abeni
2025-07-03 13:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2545704.1750869056@famine \
--to=jv@jvosburgh.net \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=carlos.bilbao@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sforshee@kernel.org \
--cc=tonghao@bamaicloud.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox