netdev - bonding: propagation of offload settings

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101030025435.GF12842@verge.net.au>
Date:	Sat, 30 Oct 2010 11:54:35 +0900
From:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
Subject: bonding: propagation of offload settings

Hi,

I am wondering what the desired behaviour for the propagating
of offload settings between master and slaves when the settings
are modified using ethtool.

I have observed the following (using Linus' latest tree, 2.6.36+)

#1 Disabling gro on a slave device propagates to the master
   but not other slaves

   bond1: generic-receive-offload: on
   eth1: generic-receive-offload: on
   eth4: generic-receive-offload: on

   # ethtool -K eth1 gro off

   bond1: generic-receive-offload: off
   eth1: generic-receive-offload: on
   eth4: generic-receive-offload: off

   This seems to occur regardless of if the slave is the
   active slave or not.

#2 No other propagation of settings occurs


It seems to me that from a user point of view it may make more sense to:

a) propagate settings from the master to the slaves and;
b) possibly disallow setting the slaves directly

--
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