Re: [PATCH V2] vlan:return error when real dev is enslaved

[Weiping Pan]

On 11/16/2011 03:19 AM, Nicolas de PesloÃan wrote:
> Le 15/11/2011 13:44, Weiping Pan a Ãcrit :
> > Qinhuibin reported a kernel panic when he do some operation about vlan.
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/6/218
> >
> > The operation is as below:
> > ifconfig eth2 up
> > modprobe bonding
> > modprobe 8021q
> > ifconfig bond0 up
> > ifenslave bond0 eth2
> > vconfig add eth2 3300
> > vconfig add bond0 33
> > vconfig rem eth2.3300
> >
> > the panic stack is as below:
> > [<ffffffffa002f1c9>] panic_event+0x49/0x70 [ipmi_msghandler]
> > [<ffffffff80378917>] notifier_call_chain+0x37/0x70
> > [<ffffffff80372122>] panic+0xa2/0x195
> > [<ffffffff80376ed8>] oops_end+0xd8/0x140
> > [<ffffffff8001bea7>] no_context+0xf7/0x280
> > [<ffffffff8001c1a5>] __bad_area_nosemaphore+0x175/0x250
> > [<ffffffff80376318>] page_fault+0x28/0x30
> > [<ffffffffa039dabd>] igb_vlan_rx_kill_vid+0x4d/0x100 [igb]
> > [<ffffffffa044045f>] bond_vlan_rx_kill_vid+0x9f/0x290 [bonding]
> > [<ffffffffa047e636>] unregister_vlan_dev+0x136/0x180 [8021q]
> > [<ffffffffa047ed20>] vlan_ioctl_handler+0x170/0x3f0 [8021q]
> > [<ffffffff802c1d3f>] sock_ioctl+0x21f/0x280
> > [<ffffffff800e6d7f>] vfs_ioctl+0x2f/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff800e726b>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x3cb/0x5a0
> > [<ffffffff800e74e1>] sys_ioctl+0xa1/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff80007388>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> > [<00007f108a2b8bd7>] 0x7f108a2b8bd7
> > And the nic is as below:
> > [root@localhost ~]# ethtool -i eth2
> > driver: igb
> > version: 3.0.6-k2
> > firmware-version: 1.2-1
> > bus-info: 0000:04:00.0
> > kernel versionï
> > 2.6.32.12-0.7 also happen in 2.6.32-131
> >
> > For kernel 2.6.32, the reason of this bug is that when we do "vconfig 
> > add bond0 33",
> > adapter->vlgrp is overwritten in igb_vlan_rx_register. So when we do 
> > "vconfig rem
> > eth2.3300", it can't find the correct vlgrp.
> >
> > And this bug is avoided by vlan cleanup patchset from Jiri Pirko
> > <jpirko@xxxxxxxxxx>, especially commit b2cb09b1a772(igb: do vlan 
> > cleanup).
> >
> > But it is not a correct operation to creat a vlan interface on eth2
> > when it have been enslaved by bond0, so this patch is to return error
> > when the real dev is already enslaved.
>
> Why isn't this setup correct?
>
> Compare to bridge, where ebtables allow for some sort of sharing of 
> the physical interface between bridge and vlan.
>
> I think bonding should behave the same way instead of denying this setup.
>
>     Nicolas.
Hi, Nicolas,

After some investigation I agree with you that this setup is correct,
since we can  "switchport trunk allowed vlan 2-3" on the switch.

I can confirm that both bonding and bridge support this kind of setup.

bond0.2                                        br0.2
      |                                                |
  eth0 ----- eth0.3                          eth0 -----eth0.3

Both works fine(git commit 06236ac3726f1),  so please discard this patch.

thanks
Weiping Pan









--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/