From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
Mark Smith
<nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual interfaces?
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 11:54:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49B565EF.7000402@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m13admbsuk.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net> writes:
>
>> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>> Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> I agree on most points. There is one fundamental operational difference
>>>> however. With macvlan, all MAC addresses are known are therefore can be
>>>> programmed as secondary unicast addresses, while a bridge always uses
>>>> promiscous mode and for unknown addresses needs to flood forward them.
>>>>
>>>> This could be changed in the bridging code of course for bridges
>>>> consisting purely of local devices. Most of the bridging stuff isn't
>>>> needed for macvlans though, so its probably easier to simply perform
>>>> a lookup for local devices in macvlan on transmit, similar to what
>>>> is done on reception.
>>> What I haven't figured out is how you handle the transmit path for
>>> broadcast and multicast ethernet traffic. How do you test to see if
>>> you have already preformed local transmission?
>> I'm not sure I understand the problem. Whats wrong with doing
>> the same as on transmit, i.e.:
>>
>> - for multicast/broadcast, deliver everywhere (except self)
>>
>> - for unicast, deliver to matching local macvlan device or
>> underlying device
>>
>>> +static int macvlan_queue_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> + const struct macvlan_dev *vlan = netdev_priv(dev);
>>> + const struct macvlan_port *port = vlan->port;
>>> + const struct macvlan_dev *dest;
>>> + const struct ethhdr *eth;
>>> - skb->dev = dev;
>>> - skb->pkt_type = PACKET_HOST;
>>> + skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
>>> + eth = eth_hdr(skb);
>>> - netif_rx(skb);
>>> - return NULL;
>>> + dst_release(skb->dst);
>>> + skb->dst = NULL;
>>> + skb->mark = 0;
>>> + secpath_reset(skb);
>>> + nf_reset(skb);
>>> +
>>> + if (is_multicast_ether_addr(eth->h_dest)) {
>>> + macvlan_broadcast(skb, port, dev);
>>> + return macvlan_xmit_world(skb, dev);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + dest = macvlan_hash_lookup(port, eth->h_dest);
>>> + if (dest)
>>> + return macvlan_unicast(skb, dest);
>>> +
>>> + return macvlan_xmit_world(skb, dev);
>>> }
>> Pretty much like this :)
>
> Yes.
>
> There are two tricky parts.
>
> One problem is that macvlans and the primary hardware device share the
> same transmit queue. So when I have a broadcast packet on the primary
> devices queue I don't know if I have already sent it out to the
> macvlan devices or not.
A flag could be added to the skb so that we know it originated from
a mac-vlan. That shouldn't require any extra hooks but just an extra
check in the mac-vlan rx code to drop any pkt received from the
underlying NIC with this flag set.
For broadcasting (or unicasting) to other mac-vlans or the underlying physical
device, the mac-vlan tx logic could check for local delivery before telling the
lower-level NIC to transmit the pkt.
Since we already have a mac hash, we could probably key off of the dest MAC
fairly easily. For broadcast, it would be a flood. We could also add a
flag to mac-vlan tx logic to be clever and only send ARP to the mac-vlans
likely to care. This might not be a good filter for all possible cases, but
for general cases, and thousands of mac-vlans, it would save a lot of work
cheaply.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-09 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-07 10:45 MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual interfaces? (was Re: [PATCH] macvlan: Support creating macvlans from macvlans) Mark Smith
2009-03-07 16:30 ` Ben Greear
2009-03-07 18:13 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-03-07 22:32 ` Mark Smith
2009-03-08 16:54 ` Ben Greear
2009-03-09 1:14 ` Mark Smith
2009-03-09 13:31 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-09 14:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-03-09 15:02 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-09 15:48 ` MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual interfaces? Eric W. Biederman
2009-03-09 15:53 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-09 16:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-03-09 16:45 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-03-09 18:58 ` Ben Greear
2009-03-09 21:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-03-09 21:23 ` Ben Greear
2009-03-09 18:33 ` Brian Haley
2009-03-09 18:54 ` Ben Greear [this message]
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=49B565EF.7000402@candelatech.com \
--to=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).