Re: [PATCH v2] net:bonding:support balance-alb interface with vlan to bridge

[Jay Vosburgh]

Sun Shouxin <sunshouxin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>In my test, balance-alb bonding with two slaves eth0 and eth1,
>and then Bond0.150 is created with vlan id attached bond0.
>After adding bond0.150 into one linux bridge, I noted that Bond0,
>bond0.150 and  bridge were assigned to the same MAC as eth0.
>Once bond0.150 receives a packet whose dest IP is bridge's
>and dest MAC is eth1's, the linux bridge will not match
>eth1's MAC entry in FDB, and not handle it as expected.
>The patch fix the issue, and diagram as below:
>
>eth1(mac:eth1_mac)--bond0(balance-alb,mac:eth0_mac)--eth0(mac:eth0_mac)
>                      |
>                   bond0.150(mac:eth0_mac)
>                      |
>                   bridge(ip:br_ip, mac:eth0_mac)--other port
>
>Suggested-by: Hu Yadi <huyd12@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Signed-off-by: Sun Shouxin <sunshouxin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

	As Nik suggested, please add some additional explanation here.
You can cut and paste my description from the original discussion if
you'd like.

>---
>
>changelog:
>v1->v2:
>  -declare variabls in reverse xmas tree order
>  -delete {}
>  -add explanation in commit message
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>index 007d43e46dcb..60cb9a0225aa 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
>@@ -653,6 +653,7 @@ static struct slave *rlb_choose_channel(struct sk_buff *skb,
> static struct slave *rlb_arp_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct bonding *bond)
> {
> 	struct slave *tx_slave = NULL;
>+	struct net_device *dev;
> 	struct arp_pkt *arp;
> 
> 	if (!pskb_network_may_pull(skb, sizeof(*arp)))
>@@ -665,6 +666,12 @@ static struct slave *rlb_arp_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct bonding *bond)
> 	if (!bond_slave_has_mac_rx(bond, arp->mac_src))
> 		return NULL;
> 
>+	dev = ip_dev_find(dev_net(bond->dev), arp->ip_src);
>+	if (dev) {
>+		if (netif_is_bridge_master(dev))
>+			return NULL;

	Stylistically, the "if dev" and "if netif_is_bridge_master"
could be one line, e.g., "if dev && netif_is_bridge_master".

	Functionally, ip_dev_find acquires a reference to dev, and this
code will need to release (dev_put) that reference.

	I'm also wondering if testing bond->dev for netif_if_bridge_port
before ip_dev_find would help here (as an optimization); I think so, for
the case where the bond is directly in the bridge without a VLAN in the
middle.

	-J


>+	}
>+
> 	if (arp->op_code == htons(ARPOP_REPLY)) {
> 		/* the arp must be sent on the selected rx channel */
> 		tx_slave = rlb_choose_channel(skb, bond, arp);
>-- 
>2.27.0
>

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx