| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5243D68F.4090806@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:39:11 +0800
From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
To: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 11/27] bonding: rework bond_3ad_xmit_xor()
to use bond_for_each_slave() only
On 2013/9/26 13:43, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:31:35AM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote:
>
> First of all - thanks a lot for the review! Answered below.
>
>> On 2013/9/25 15:20, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
>>> Currently, there are two loops - first we find the first slave in an
>>> aggregator after the xmit_hash_policy() returned number, and after that we
>>> loop from that slave, over bonding head, and till that slave to find any
>>> suitable slave to send the packet through.
>>>
>>> Replace it by just one bond_for_each_slave() loop, which first loops
>>> through the requested number of slaves, saving the first suitable one, and
>>> after that we've hit the requested number of slaves to skip - search for
>>> any up slave to send the packet through. If we don't find such kind of
>>> slave - then just send the packet through the first suitable slave found.
>>>
>>> Logic remains unchainged, and we skip two loops. Also, refactor it a bit
>>> for readability.
>>>
>>> CC: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
>>> CC: Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Notes:
>>> v4 -> v5
>>> No change.
>>>
>>> v3 -> v4:
>>> No change.
>>>
>>> v2 -> v3:
>>> No change.
>>>
>>> v1 -> v2:
>>> No changes.
>>>
>>> RFC -> v1:
>>> New patch.
>>>
>>> drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
>>> index 3847aee..c861ee7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
>>> @@ -2417,15 +2417,15 @@ int bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info(struct bonding *bond, struct ad_info *ad_info)
>>>
>>> int bond_3ad_xmit_xor(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
>>> {
>>> - struct slave *slave, *start_at;
>>> struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(dev);
>>> + struct slave *slave, *first_ok_slave;
>>> + struct aggregator *agg;
>>> + struct ad_info ad_info;
>>> struct list_head *iter;
>>> - int slave_agg_no;
>>> int slaves_in_agg;
>>> - int agg_id;
>>> - int i;
>>> - struct ad_info ad_info;
>>> + int slave_agg_no;
>>> int res = 1;
>>> + int agg_id;
>>>
>>> read_lock(&bond->lock);
>>> if (__bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info(bond, &ad_info)) {
>>> @@ -2438,20 +2438,28 @@ int bond_3ad_xmit_xor(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
>>> agg_id = ad_info.aggregator_id;
>>>
>>> if (slaves_in_agg == 0) {
>>> - /*the aggregator is empty*/
>>> pr_debug("%s: Error: active aggregator is empty\n", dev->name);
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> slave_agg_no = bond->xmit_hash_policy(skb, slaves_in_agg);
>>> + first_ok_slave = NULL;
>>>
>>> bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, iter) {
>>> - struct aggregator *agg = SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave).port.aggregator;
>>> + agg = SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave).port.aggregator;
>>> + if (!agg || agg->aggregator_identifier != agg_id)
>>> + continue;
>>>
>>> - if (agg && (agg->aggregator_identifier == agg_id)) {
>>> + if (slave_agg_no >= 0) {
>>> + if (!first_ok_slave && SLAVE_IS_OK(slave))
>>> + first_ok_slave = slave;
>>> slave_agg_no--;
>>> - if (slave_agg_no < 0)
>>> - break;
>>> + continue;
>>> + }
>
> [1] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>>> +
>>> + if (SLAVE_IS_OK(slave)) {
>>> + res = bond_dev_queue_xmit(bond, skb, slave->dev);
>>> + goto out;
>>> }
>
> [2] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>>
>> I think you miss something, you will send skb always by the first suitable port,
>> it could not support load balance.
>
> Well, yes, it will send always by the first suitable port AFTER
> slave_agg_no, returned by the xmit_hash_policy(), which is the whole point
> in the hash function and in the load balance.
>
> It will first loop through the slaves, decrementing slave_agg_no to a
> negative value, while saving the first good to send slave, as shown in [1].
> Notice the "continue;":
>
> if (slave_agg_no >= 0) {
> if (!first_ok_slave && SLAVE_IS_OK(slave))
> first_ok_slave = slave;
> slave_agg_no--;
> continue;
> }
>
yes, I got your opinion, tnanks.
> Once we hit the negative value - which means we've skipped enough slaves,
> as requested by the hash function - we can start looking for the first
> slave that is good to send AFTER those all skipped slaves, as shown in [2].
>
> Down the patch we also use that 'first_ok_slave' - in case we didn't find
> any suitable one after we've skipped first slave_agg_no and till the last
> slave, so it implements the same 'circular' logic as was in
> bond_for_each_slave_from().
>
>> pls consult my function.
>> if (agg && (agg->aggregator_identifier == agg_id)) {
>> - slave_agg_no--;
>> - if (slave_agg_no < 0)
>> - break;
>> + if (--slave_agg_no < 0) {
>> + if (SLAVE_IS_OK(slave)) {
>> + res = bond_dev_queue_xmit(bond,
>> + skb, slave->dev);
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> + }
>
> I'll review your function in your patch.
>
>> }
>> }
>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -2461,20 +2469,10 @@ int bond_3ad_xmit_xor(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
>>> goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - start_at = slave;
>>> -
>>> - bond_for_each_slave_from(bond, slave, i, start_at) {
>>> - int slave_agg_id = 0;
>>> - struct aggregator *agg = SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave).port.aggregator;
>>> -
>>> - if (agg)
>>> - slave_agg_id = agg->aggregator_identifier;
>>> -
>>> - if (SLAVE_IS_OK(slave) && agg && (slave_agg_id == agg_id)) {
>>> - res = bond_dev_queue_xmit(bond, skb, slave->dev);
>>> - break;
>>> - }
>>> - }
>>> + /* we couldn't find any suitable slave after the agg_no, so use the
>>> + * first suitable found, if found. */
>>> + if (first_ok_slave)
>>> + res = bond_dev_queue_xmit(bond, skb, first_ok_slave->dev);
>>>
>>> out:
>>> read_unlock(&bond->lock);
>>>
>>
>>
>
> .
>
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists