| Message ID | 3072c40712c2f5506fc57937da921da0d3d83450.1331778582.git.panweiping3@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
Weiping Pan <panweiping3@gmail.com> wrote: >Liang Zheng(lzheng@redhat.com) found that in the following topo, >bonding does not send igmp report when we trigger a fail-over of bonding. > >eth0-- > |-- bond0 -- br0 >eth1-- > >modprobe bonding mode=1 miimon=100 resend_igmp=10 >ifconfig bond0 up >ifenslave bond0 eth0 eth1 > >brctl addbr br0 >ifconfig br0 192.168.100.2/24 up >brctl addif br0 bond0 > >Add 192.168.100.2(br0) into a multicast group, like 224.10.10.10, >then trigger a fali-over in bonding. >You can see that parameter "resend_igmp" does not work. > >The reason is that when we add br0 into a multicast group, >it does not propagate multicast knowledge down to its ports. > >If we choose to propagate multicast knowledge down to all ports for bridge, >then we have to track every change that is done to bridge, and keep a backup >for all ports. It is hard to track, I think. > >Instead I choose to modify bonding to send igmp report for its master. > >Changelog: >V2: correct comments >V3: move this check into bond_resend_igmp_join_requests() > >Signed-off-by: Weiping Pan <panweiping3@gmail.com> >--- > drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c >index 435984a..037fdd3 100644 >--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c >+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c >@@ -766,18 +766,26 @@ static void __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(struct net_device *dev) > */ > static void bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(struct bonding *bond) > { >- struct net_device *vlan_dev; >+ struct net_device *bond_dev, *vlan_dev, *master_dev; > struct vlan_entry *vlan; > > read_lock(&bond->lock); > >+ bond_dev = bond->dev; >+ > /* rejoin all groups on bond device */ >- __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(bond->dev); >+ __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(bond_dev); >+ >+ /* rejoin all groups on its master */ >+ master_dev = bond_dev->master; >+ if (unlikely(master_dev)) { >+ __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(master_dev); >+ } Will this do the right thing if the master is not a bridge? Granted, right now the only other possible master is a team (since bonding will not enslave itself), but is this generically safe and desirable for any possible master_dev? -J > /* rejoin all groups on vlan devices */ > list_for_each_entry(vlan, &bond->vlan_list, vlan_list) { > rcu_read_lock(); >- vlan_dev = __vlan_find_dev_deep(bond->dev, >+ vlan_dev = __vlan_find_dev_deep(bond_dev, > vlan->vlan_id); > rcu_read_unlock(); > if (vlan_dev) >-- >1.7.4.4 --- -Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:43:19PM -0700, Jay Vosburgh wrote: > Weiping Pan <panweiping3@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Liang Zheng(lzheng@redhat.com) found that in the following topo, > >bonding does not send igmp report when we trigger a fail-over of bonding. > > > >eth0-- > > |-- bond0 -- br0 > >eth1-- > > > >modprobe bonding mode=1 miimon=100 resend_igmp=10 > >ifconfig bond0 up > >ifenslave bond0 eth0 eth1 > > > >brctl addbr br0 > >ifconfig br0 192.168.100.2/24 up > >brctl addif br0 bond0 > > > >Add 192.168.100.2(br0) into a multicast group, like 224.10.10.10, > >then trigger a fali-over in bonding. > >You can see that parameter "resend_igmp" does not work. > > > >The reason is that when we add br0 into a multicast group, > >it does not propagate multicast knowledge down to its ports. > > > >If we choose to propagate multicast knowledge down to all ports for bridge, > >then we have to track every change that is done to bridge, and keep a backup > >for all ports. It is hard to track, I think. > > > >Instead I choose to modify bonding to send igmp report for its master. > > > >Changelog: > >V2: correct comments > >V3: move this check into bond_resend_igmp_join_requests() > > > >Signed-off-by: Weiping Pan <panweiping3@gmail.com> > >--- > > drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > > 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c > >index 435984a..037fdd3 100644 > >--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c > >+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c > >@@ -766,18 +766,26 @@ static void __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(struct net_device *dev) > > */ > > static void bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(struct bonding *bond) > > { > >- struct net_device *vlan_dev; > >+ struct net_device *bond_dev, *vlan_dev, *master_dev; > > struct vlan_entry *vlan; > > > > read_lock(&bond->lock); > > > >+ bond_dev = bond->dev; > >+ > > /* rejoin all groups on bond device */ > >- __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(bond->dev); > >+ __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(bond_dev); > >+ > >+ /* rejoin all groups on its master */ > >+ master_dev = bond_dev->master; > >+ if (unlikely(master_dev)) { > >+ __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(master_dev); > >+ } > > Will this do the right thing if the master is not a bridge? > Granted, right now the only other possible master is a team (since > bonding will not enslave itself), but is this generically safe and > desirable for any possible master_dev? > I agree with Jay. You should also check the private flags to see if IFF_BRIDGE_PORT is set. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c index 435984a..037fdd3 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c @@ -766,18 +766,26 @@ static void __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(struct net_device *dev) */ static void bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(struct bonding *bond) { - struct net_device *vlan_dev; + struct net_device *bond_dev, *vlan_dev, *master_dev; struct vlan_entry *vlan; read_lock(&bond->lock); + bond_dev = bond->dev; + /* rejoin all groups on bond device */ - __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(bond->dev); + __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(bond_dev); + + /* rejoin all groups on its master */ + master_dev = bond_dev->master; + if (unlikely(master_dev)) { + __bond_resend_igmp_join_requests(master_dev); + } /* rejoin all groups on vlan devices */ list_for_each_entry(vlan, &bond->vlan_list, vlan_list) { rcu_read_lock(); - vlan_dev = __vlan_find_dev_deep(bond->dev, + vlan_dev = __vlan_find_dev_deep(bond_dev, vlan->vlan_id); rcu_read_unlock(); if (vlan_dev)
Liang Zheng(lzheng@redhat.com) found that in the following topo, bonding does not send igmp report when we trigger a fail-over of bonding. eth0-- |-- bond0 -- br0 eth1-- modprobe bonding mode=1 miimon=100 resend_igmp=10 ifconfig bond0 up ifenslave bond0 eth0 eth1 brctl addbr br0 ifconfig br0 192.168.100.2/24 up brctl addif br0 bond0 Add 192.168.100.2(br0) into a multicast group, like 224.10.10.10, then trigger a fali-over in bonding. You can see that parameter "resend_igmp" does not work. The reason is that when we add br0 into a multicast group, it does not propagate multicast knowledge down to its ports. If we choose to propagate multicast knowledge down to all ports for bridge, then we have to track every change that is done to bridge, and keep a backup for all ports. It is hard to track, I think. Instead I choose to modify bonding to send igmp report for its master. Changelog: V2: correct comments V3: move this check into bond_resend_igmp_join_requests() Signed-off-by: Weiping Pan <panweiping3@gmail.com> --- drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 14 +++++++++++--- 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)