[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1295280044.6264.5.camel@bwh-desktop>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:00:44 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
jesse@...ira.com, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: 2.6.37 regression: adding main interface to a bridge breaks
vlan interface RX
On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 14:09 +0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
> [ 1.666706] forcedeth 0000:00:08.0: ifname eth0, PHY OUI 0x5043 @ 16, addr 00:e0:81:4d:2b:ec
> [ 1.666767] forcedeth 0000:00:08.0: highdma csum vlan pwrctl mgmt gbit lnktim msi desc-v3
>
> I have eth0 and eth0.3840 which works until I add eth0 to a bridge.
> While eth0 is in a bridge (the bridge device is up), eth0.3840 is unable
> to receive packets. Using tcpdump on eth0 shows the packets being
> received with a VLAN tag but they don't appear on eth0.3840. They appear
> with the VLAN tag on the bridge interface.
[...]
This means the behaviour is now consistent, whether or not hardware VLAN
tag stripping is enabled. (I previously pointed out the inconsistent
behaviour in <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/149864>.) I
would consider this an improvement.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists