netdev - Re: e100 + VLANs?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:13:43 +0200
From:	David Lamparter <equinox@...c24.net>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>,
	David Lamparter <equinox@...c24.net>,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: e100 + VLANs?

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 05:05:52PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > When pinging this NIC from another machine over VLAN5, I see
> > ARP packets coming to it, gets recognized and replies going
> > back, all on vlan 5.  But on the other side, replies comes
> > WITHOUT a VLAN tag!
> > 
> > From this NIC's point of view, capturing on whole ethX:
> > 
> > 00:1f:c6:ef:e5:1b > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype 802.1Q (0x8100), length 60: vlan 5, p 0, ethertype ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Request who-has 10.48.11.2 tell 10.48.11.1, length 42
> > 00:90:27:30:6d:1c > 00:1f:c6:ef:e5:1b, ethertype 802.1Q (0x8100), length 46: vlan 5, p 0, ethertype ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Reply 10.48.11.2 is-at 00:90:27:30:6d:1c, length 28
> > 
> > From the partner point of view, also on whole ethX:
> > 
> > 00:1f:c6:ef:e5:1b > ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, ethertype 802.1Q (0x8100), length 46: vlan 5, p 0, ethertype ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Request who-has 10.48.11.2 tell 10.48.11.1, length 28
> > 00:90:27:30:6d:1c > 00:1f:c6:ef:e5:1b, ethertype ARP (0x0806), length 60: Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Reply 10.48.11.2 is-at 00:90:27:30:6d:1c, length 46
> > 
> > So, the tag gets eaten somewhere along the way... ;)

Hmm. Looks like broken VLAN TX offload, but the driver doesn't even
implement VLAN offload. Maybe it's broken in its non-implementation...

Your "partner" is a known-good setup and can be assumed to be working
correctly? This is over a crossover cable, no evil switches involved?

> > And I can't really recreate the situation which I had - I know
> > some packets were flowing, so at least ARP worked.  Now it
> > does not work anymore.
> 
> What the 'partner' setup looks like ?
> 
> ip link
> ip addr
> ip ro

'local' setup too please :)


-David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html