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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735EBC43387 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 02:58:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC8E20675 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 02:58:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730771AbfAPC6c (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2019 21:58:32 -0500 Received: from drutsystem.com ([84.10.39.251]:52388 "EHLO drutsystem.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726863AbfAPC6c (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jan 2019 21:58:32 -0500 Received: from [10.227.137.2] (89-78-107-182.dynamic.chello.pl [89.78.107.182]) by drutsystem.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A025B63F819; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 03:58:25 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] bonding: fix PACKET_ORIGDEV regression on bonding masters To: =?UTF-8?B?TWFoZXNoIEJhbmRld2FyICjgpK7gpLngpYfgpLYg4KSs4KSC4KSh4KWH4KS1?= =?UTF-8?B?4KS+4KSwKQ==?= , Vincent Bernat Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=c5=bbenczykowski?= , David Miller , Linux NetDev , Jay Vosburgh , Chonggang Li References: <20190107162946.13072-1-soltys@ziu.info> <20190107162946.13072-2-soltys@ziu.info> <20190113.150355.1753998293477839740.davem@davemloft.net> <87imyr3bzb.fsf@bernat.ch> From: Michal Soltys Message-ID: <8aa3dcac-3597-5576-741f-849985ce8d1d@ziu.info> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 03:58:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MailScanner-ID: A025B63F819.A191B X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details X-MailScanner-From: soltys@ziu.info Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 19/01/15 03:19, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:00 AM Vincent Bernat wrote: >> >> ❦ 13 janvier 2019 18:01 -08, Maciej Żenczykowski : >> >> > But I seem to recall that the core problem we were trying to solve was >> > that a daemon listening >> > on an AF_PACKET ethertype 88CC [LLDP] socket not bound to any device >> > would not receive LLDP packets >> > arriving on inactive bond slaves (either active-backup or lag). >> >> Just tested and with 4.9.150, I am in fact unable to receive anything >> on a backup link when listening to the active-backup master device or to >> "any" device. >> >> > Perhaps going from: >> > /* don't change skb->dev for link-local packets */ >> > if (is_link_local_ether_addr(eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest)) return RX_HANDLER_PASS; >> > if (bond_should_deliver_exact_match(skb, slave, bond)) return >> > RX_HANDLER_EXACT; >> > >> > to something more like: >> > if (bond_should_deliver_exact_match(skb, slave, bond)) { >> > /* don't change skb->dev for link-local packets on inactive slaves */ >> > if (is_link_local_ether_addr(eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest)) return RX_HANDLER_PASS; >> > return RX_HANDLER_EXACT; >> > } >> > >> > would fix both problems? >> > thanks for jumping in and offering a solution. This should fix the issue. > > NACK for the revert-patch! > > Folks, please, revert is not the solution! Last time when there was a > problem posted I offered you a solution, so wasn't that enough to > prove that we care about solving the problem that you are facing while > continuing to have this functionality? No one wants to break your use > case, it happens only because one is not aware of it. Thank you David > for resorting to resolve it. Mahesh, that's not it. But: Since Vincent reported PACKET_ORIGDEV regression late november, none of you replied to anything posted until now. And if David hadn't called you guys directly, I'm not sure you would have at this point. Reverting and Vincent's offer to patch to update packet(7) were also clearly mentioned in the previous thread, none of them commented/nacked/acked either. Me an Vincent have been scratching our head for a while off list - but our guessing can only go as far as time goes on. Maciej now was the first to ever provide the actual details about the issue you were facing originally. My bad I haven't added him to CC from the very beginning. Anyway, I'll test Maciej's version in bridging context in coming days and look closer at the code overall. It probably works fine if Vincent is seeing packets on masters, but I'd rather be sure.