netdev - Re: 2.6.31 ARP related problems

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]

Message-ID: <4A9E62FB.6090000@Voltaire.com>
Date:	Wed, 02 Sep 2009 15:20:11 +0300
From:	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...taire.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	"Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
	"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: 2.6.31 ARP related problems 

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> I just tested.  If the two macvlans are in separate network namespaces all is well,
> so definitely not macvlan. As you have observed there are no real changes to arp.c

Yes, it's not macvlan to blame, I just tested it in SR-IOV scheme with igb/igbvf and
I see the same problem, only ping that goes through / targeted to the IP address of the first
VF device routing hit works, which means SR-IOV isn't really usable with 2.6.31 when you want 
a multiple VMs scheme, each attached to a different VF and all VMs on the same network segment.

Or.
--
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