[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YhSfYyh3xU4HZKek@Air-de-Roger>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 09:31:31 +0100
From: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>
To: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
<marmarek@...isiblethingslab.com>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Michael Brown <mcb30@...e.org>, Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
Paul Durrant <paul@....org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
"moderated list:XEN NETWORK BACKEND DRIVER"
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
"open list:XEN NETWORK BACKEND DRIVER" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Revert "xen-netback: Check for hotplug-status
existence before watching"
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 01:18:17AM +0100, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> This reverts commit 2afeec08ab5c86ae21952151f726bfe184f6b23d.
>
> The reasoning in the commit was wrong - the code expected to setup the
> watch even if 'hotplug-status' didn't exist. In fact, it relied on the
> watch being fired the first time - to check if maybe 'hotplug-status' is
> already set to 'connected'. Not registering a watch for non-existing
> path (which is the case if hotplug script hasn't been executed yet),
> made the backend not waiting for the hotplug script to execute. This in
> turns, made the netfront think the interface is fully operational, while
> in fact it was not (the vif interface on xen-netback side might not be
> configured yet).
>
> This was a workaround for 'hotplug-status' erroneously being removed.
> But since that is reverted now, the workaround is not necessary either.
>
> More discussion at
> https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/afedd7cb-a291-e773-8b0d-4db9b291fa98@ipxe.org/T/#u
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@...isiblethingslab.com>
> ---
> I believe this is the same issue as discussed at
> https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20220113111946.GA4133739@dingwall.me.uk/
Right - I believe we need to leave that workaround in place in libxl
in order to deal with bogus Linux netbacks?
Thanks, Roger.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists