From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: Problem with VLANs and via-velocity driver Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 07:40:39 +0100 Message-ID: <4AFCFF67.3060802@trash.net> References: <20091113033217.GQ838@cubit> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Kevin Shanahan Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:42753 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753784AbZKMGkg (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 01:40:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091113033217.GQ838@cubit> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Kevin Shanahan wrote: > Hi, > > I've had some problems with getting a fairly simple (I thought) VLAN > configuration working with the on board Via NICs on my Via M700 > board. Looks like as soon as a tagged VLAN interface is added, the > underlying "raw" (untagged) interface stops responding. > > ... > > A bit of searching found a few references to similar problems going > back a few years (2005, 2007). Sounded like there were some driver > issues, but it wasn't clear from the messages I found whether they > were believed to be fixed or not. I tried the same test using a > differnt NIC with the tg3 driver and there were no problems, so it > looks to me like it's still a via-velocity issue. Unfortunately I > don't have room to add NICs to this machine and need to use the on > board Via hardware. There's some special-casing for VID 0 in velocity_init_cam_filter(). Does "ip link add link eth0 type vlan id 0" make any difference? If not, does "ip link set eth0 promisc on"?