netdev - Re: bonding (IEEE 802.3ad) not working with qemu/virtio

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:	Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:35:35 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:	Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	=?UTF-8?Q?Bj=c3=b8rnar_Ness?= 
	<bjornar.ness@...il.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: bonding (IEEE 802.3ad) not working with qemu/virtio

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 01:45:00PM -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> 
> >On 01/25/2016 05:24 PM, Bjørnar Ness wrote:
> >> As subject says, 802.3ad bonding is not working with virtio network model.
> >> 
> >> The only errors I see is:
> >> 
> >> No 802.3ad response from the link partner for any adapters in the bond.
> >> 
> >> Dumping the network traffic shows that no LACP packets are sent from the
> >> host running with virtio driver, changing to for example e1000 solves
> >> this problem
> >> with no configuration changes.
> >> 
> >> Is this a known problem?
> >> 
> >[Including bonding maintainers for comments]
> >
> >Hi,
> >Here's a workaround patch for virtio_net devices that "cheats" the
> >duplex test (which is the actual problem). I've tested this locally
> >and it works for me.
> >I'd let the others comment on the implementation, there're other signs
> >that can be used to distinguish a virtio_net device so I'm open to suggestions.
> >Also feedback if this is at all acceptable would be appreciated.
> 
> 	Should virtio instead provide an arbitrary speed and full duplex
> to ethtool, as veth does?
> 
> 	Creating a magic whitelist of devices deep inside the 802.3ad
> implementation seems less desirable.
> 
> 	-J

Absolutely but why not tream DUPLEX_UNKNOWN as DUPLEX_FULL
and allow LACP?

> ---
> 	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com