From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9093B81E for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744763719; cv=none; b=LRyMl5kQMo2v5/ZJx1yAzqWwYuAxRMp6CBlYWHm93PWzfogHIApyRnJk8D2WYWdoMnO5KAZN/JIYOAr+Glr/1sEiF2PEmPEEp/8hFEfDqQC0WpzSreuetdfMczOBOK9dDOhVJr/a1RO6UDvNAr7tPV8Nq24mhZikAfAm3lWNpaM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744763719; c=relaxed/simple; bh=c3w/cww/hKY8YsDyvfqlOtU6pCx4OZRIDJ09qMpdmKE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VkJm5ufMPqiYLXtBc1Oy353NGnxtV40pvT48Xe9t/misBgzb6YM4SXTuqvP/G3U9UFmKndjsacZAY7TuX3KnMiRLSnMNFE0yaYoHF2+lI+37KMK28/Rj/q+N29Ru8vQNsns1OkExxwNaC3Cv49eeR05Xz1JX6rfjLiZa4+4aZBk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=Pieli/QA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Pieli/QA" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1744763715; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OqQ1YTSTJJUKkFlxIuDS71mLe4oyEpxEPnrftDCzEKQ=; b=Pieli/QAUojwzFlHy2yF89PlrvYBv2JVZcE6QzALkR71A3XeUfa6gBN3QMfhNTw5HpP5iU AE8k60YUXFA7n+2NMZaAIRSPtNdWy3JOuN4k0/2w7FqSeN4u8ryDBtkw7fJfjMxA7OQ3GI 4mZg4ZX2iEdZi6sCcUGQXPC8xCk+eXk= Received: from mail-pf1-f198.google.com (mail-pf1-f198.google.com [209.85.210.198]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-681-W2frdVDqNG-XI8jGJp6G0g-1; Tue, 15 Apr 2025 20:35:13 -0400 X-MC-Unique: W2frdVDqNG-XI8jGJp6G0g-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: W2frdVDqNG-XI8jGJp6G0g_1744763713 Received: by mail-pf1-f198.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-7370e73f690so6662361b3a.3 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2025 17:35:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1744763712; x=1745368512; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=OqQ1YTSTJJUKkFlxIuDS71mLe4oyEpxEPnrftDCzEKQ=; b=Dz+fec2on3relCL8sxWcSt3wRo5GMmIhvnMXJarAIO2uB4tM8efNd0gHr+xR1eYFjS KiYCNuvxboDp2NgVYAKuxgW06ahk7RWgk+47K8Vp6CW6DTuJUHHetp2DzU8fKcpsCrZb Pj93nzWaQs7Xat3yN7cGgEpWnXTF8defRYyOMiPrT2c48jIMHesE7T3kU3r6cxkweWZi sWsRLg7qEM9O3xaoZ/AWf6rG//R2i89n6zOkMjYSI9F7Y2lnmciiosr3wW6/IxDH/m65 h1osl7lZmKA9tV713HCpxfQy55gIIUvGeKtpenUXolumKhHmq/0QLcm6ATYvM4b69ppz 4s5w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVOwagF8os/h+/qNw18xhpAfuevV+/VXDpxUdIlbTg5w4LA8l76W08R305ee2BYqSpcJKKKkk0=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzoAlvFpkdLV1CjWty6e+WwiI4rIZZW3xpPxeRoyJQYii9EV3E4 gMi2eMpm4kYmxL9DA2Cc+JYfdSfYhoBuU5ne4fCzGW3M/OTLgSpJqOgJjQ4U3fkN0fLv88KfbvL Oiwq8scxJhmW2GOJbl0S6mLqc6VZVlV4Uj8VtHD6nREijGd+8LnR3 X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuatvqbWg0xOTZU8+i3cHT7E2XI4/G8mZsUpPrgiqPdxhN0gjwn+l+qgWuyTT9 aQeJdYZL33zRgB04OgByq48QP2XRKlEHQ7obTR6ppUYbmh5AyNjvzPlC6u3jyaAnN1gora+FLdv P+g8IMJCTvLnODS/W76xT/r/Ukcw76WjkHRZfobGc9J8Pv7RRHWSRbbgGaTKJ1TBWAJno47DQnN B9Kir7EmNpQ3VMk99HsTP+/wkXUPIukL0eo1s03mz4BqsjlrcqGxv/aSxjLL5f+H/ppWW5WN8je p12rHwDJSg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6300:668a:b0:1f5:87dc:a315 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-203adfc1699mr1499052637.12.1744763712635; Tue, 15 Apr 2025 17:35:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IESmh55jz+291Dq/91ibqxucuc/JG+x5nUer4M3PeJgsNIbjMm0hVYWqRPMhIQzq3z2y9FxFw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6300:668a:b0:1f5:87dc:a315 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-203adfc1699mr1499027637.12.1744763712230; Tue, 15 Apr 2025 17:35:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fedora ([209.132.188.88]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-b0b220e9d35sm151243a12.38.2025.04.15.17.35.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 15 Apr 2025 17:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:35:06 +0000 From: Hangbin Liu To: David Wilder Cc: Jay Vosburgh , Ilya Maximets , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "pradeeps@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , Pradeep Satyanarayana , Adrian Moreno Zapata Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] bonding: Adding limmited support for ARP monitoring with ovs. Message-ID: References: <20250411174906.21022-1-wilder@us.ibm.com> <20250411174906.21022-2-wilder@us.ibm.com> <3885709.1744415868@famine> <4164872.1744747795@famine> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:13:18PM +0000, David Wilder wrote: > >>> I agree that adding options is almost never a great solution. But I had a > >>> similar thought. I don't think this option should be limited to OVS though, > >>>as OVS is only one of the cases where the current verification logic is not > >>>sufficient. > > > > Agreed; I wasn't really thinking about the not-OVS cases when I > >wrote that, but whatever is changed, if anything, should be generic. > > >>What if we build on the arp_ip_target setting. Allow for a list of vlan tags > >> to be appended to each target. Something like: arp_ip_target=x.x.x.x[vlan,vlan,...]. > >> If a list of tags is omitted it works as before, if a list is supplied assume we know what were doing > >> and use that instead of calling bond_verify_device_path(). An empty list would be valid. > > > Hmm, that's ... not too bad; I was thinking more along the lines > >of a "skip the checks" option, but this may be a much cleaner way to do > >it. > > > That said, are you thinking that bonding would add the VLAN > >tags, or that some third party would add them? I.e., are you trying to > >accomodate the case wherein OVS, tc, or whatever, is adding a tag? > > It would be up to the administrator to add the list of tags to the arp_target list. > I am unsure how a third party could know what tags might be added by other components. > Knowing what tags to add to the list may be hard to figure out in a complicated configuration. > The upside is it should be possible to configure for any list of tags even if difficult. > > A "skip the checks" option would be easier to code. If we skip the process of gathering tags > would that eliminate any configurations with any vlan tags?. +1 for "skip the checks". If arp_ip_target=x.x.x.x[vlan,vlan,...] doesn't ask bond to add vlan tags, there is no need to set the vlan in parameter. Since OVS, tc, netfilter can add vlan or change the output ports. A "skip the checks" setting looks more reasonable. Thanks Hangbin