From: Hangbin Liu <hangbin.liu@linux.dev>
To: luyun <luyun_611@163.com>
Cc: jv@jvosburgh.net, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net,
edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
maheshb@google.com, razor@blackwall.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3] bonding: 3ad: select a port when the TX array is empty
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 17:52:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <asyt2Gt4LzKWWnZS@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <463c6b0e-8b46-4c70-b9d8-56b42beaa7d0@163.com>
Hi Lu Yun,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 03:20:09PM +0800, luyun wrote:
>
> 在 2026/10/10 17:43, Hangbin Liu 写道:
> > Hi Lu Yun,
> > On Thu, Oct 08, 2026 at 10:40:31AM +0800, Yun Lu wrote:
> > > From: Yun Lu <luyun@kylinos.cn>
> > >
> > > This issue was observed on a machine in real use. During 802.3ad
> > > bring-up in production, packets were dropped even though the bond's
> > > carrier was up and LACP had enabled ports for distribution. The
> > > transmit path only consults usable_slaves and returns no slave when
> > > the array is NULL or its count is zero.
> > >
> > > LACP port eligibility and the TX array are updated separately. The
> > > state machine enables ports and updates carrier before scheduling
> > > slave_arr_work to rebuild and publish the array. The worker requires
> > > RTNL and retries if rtnl_trylock() fails, so RTNL contention can
> > > prolong the interval in which eligible ports exist but the cached
> > > array is empty.
> > >
> > > Add a fallback for 802.3ad when the usable array is empty and carrier
> > > is up. Walk the RCU-protected slave list and use ports whose
> > > aggregator is active and which pass bond_slave_can_tx(), without
> > > taking mode_lock or changing LACP state. In 802.3ad mode the
> > > per-slave active flag is set only by the mux machine for ports of the
> > > active aggregator, so these lockless reads identify distributable
> > > ports with the same criteria bond_update_slave_arr() applies when
> > > building the array.
> > `bond_update_slave_arr()` is called from `bond_enslave()`, and it should be
> > very fast. Could we add a check in `bond_3ad_state_machine_handler()` or
> > another suitable place to ensure usable slaves exist before entering the
> > distribution state?
> >
> > The fallback path seems somewhat complex and costly. Or you can wait for
> > Jay's feedback.
>
> Hi Hangbin,
>
> Thanks for the review and the suggestion.
>
> bond_enslave() does call bond_update_slave_arr() synchronously, but at
> that point the newly enslaved 802.3ad port is still inactive and there
> is usually no active aggregator yet, so that call typically resets both
> arrays to NULL. The problematic window opens later, when LACP
Ah, yes.
> convergence completes, and it comes from the delay stages between port
> enablement and array publication:
>
> 1) The state machine enables the port and brings carrier up inside the
> sweep (__enable_port() -> bond_3ad_set_carrier()), but slave_arr_work
> is only queued after mode_lock is released.
>
> 2) bond->wq is an ordered workqueue shared with ad_work, mcast_work and
> peer_notify_work, so slave_arr_work runs only after the work items
> queued ahead of it finish, on top of normal scheduler latency under
> boot load.
>
> 3) The worker needs RTNL. rtnl_lock is global: any concurrent netdev
> operation (e.g. udev / network manager churn during boot) makes
> rtnl_trylock() fail, and the worker requeues itself with a 1 jiffy
> delay, retrying until RTNL becomes available. This was exactly the
> situation on the production machine where we hit the problem.
>
> During this window carrier is up and the ports are already
> collecting/distributing, but usable_slaves is still NULL or empty, so
> every packet goes through bond_tx_drop() and the sender sees no error.
> In production ARP simply never went out.
>
> A control-path check before entering the distribution state would be
> circular with the current builder: bond_update_slave_arr() only picks
> ports that already pass bond_slave_can_tx(), and that flag is set by
> the mux machine itself on entering collecting/distributing. Waiting
> for a non-empty array before enabling the first port never converges.
I feel calling bond_update_slave_arr after collecting/distributing is a bit
late. Maybe we should start updating slave array after entering
LACP_STATE_SYNCHRONIZATION, cause after that we start sending
LACP sync messages, which means the port is already up and usable.
>
> Deferring the mux transition instead would delay carrier-on, be
> visible to the LACP partner, and under RTNL contention extend bring-up
> by the same delay the fallback covers, so traffic would not flow any
> sooner. The builder also needs RTNL, may sleep and takes mode_lock
> itself, so it cannot be called from the mux critical section; a
> control-path fix means splitting array preparation from port
> enablement, with recovery when RTNL or allocation fails.
>
> On cost: the fallback only runs when the array is empty, so the normal
> transmit path is untouched. Inside the window it is a lockless RCU list
> walk with no new state; the second pass and the broadcast branch are
> there to keep the array path's hash mapping and broadcast_neighbor
> semantics.
>
> I would also like Jay's feedback on the preferred direction. If a
> control-path solution is preferred, I am open to working on separating
> array preparation from port enablement, as long as it does not change
> LACP convergence behavior.
+1
Thanks
Hangbin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-12 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-08 2:40 [PATCH net v3] bonding: 3ad: select a port when the TX array is empty Yun Lu
2026-10-10 9:43 ` Hangbin Liu
2026-10-12 7:20 ` luyun
2026-10-12 9:52 ` Hangbin Liu [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=asyt2Gt4LzKWWnZS@fedora \
--to=hangbin.liu@linux.dev \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jv@jvosburgh.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=luyun_611@163.com \
--cc=maheshb@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=razor@blackwall.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