[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29645.1399481039@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 09:43:59 -0700
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
To: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
Patric McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] bonding: Fix stacked device detection in arp monitoring
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com> wrote:
>Prior to commit fbd929f2dce460456807a51e18d623db3db9f077
> bonding: support QinQ for bond arp interval
>
>the arp monitoring code allowed for proper detection of devices
>stacked on top of vlans. Since the above commit, the
>code can still detect a device stacked on top of single
>vlan, but not a device stacked on top of Q-in-Q configuration.
>The search will only set the inner vlan tag if the route
>device is the vlan device. However, this is not always the
>case, as it is possible to extend the stacked configuration.
>
>With this patch it is possible to provision devices on
>top Q-in-Q vlan configuration that should be used as
>a source of ARP monitoring information.
>
>For example:
>ip link add link bond0 vlan10 type vlan proto 802.1q id 10
>ip link add link vlan10 vlan100 type vlan proto 802.1q id 100
>ip link add link vlan100 type macvlan
>
>Note: This patch limites the number of stacked VLANs to 2,
>just like before. The original, however had another issue
>in that if we had more then 2 levels of VLANs, we would end
>up generating incorrectly tagged traffic. This is no longer
>possible.
>
>Fixes: fbd929f2dce460456807a51e18d623db3db9f077 (bonding: support QinQ for bond arp interval)
>CC: Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>
>CC: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
>CC: Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
>CC: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
>CC: Patric McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
>Signed-off-by: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>
>---
>v2->v1:
>* Changed the function name to better describe what the function is doing.
> We are not just finding the stack of vlan devices, we are also verifything
> the path between the bonding device and the route output device.
>* Added some more commenets about what the function is doing.
>* Fixed an issue with multiple peer vlans.
>* Removed all occurances of 'inner' and 'outer' and replaced it with tag
> array.
I think you may have misunderstood my prior comment; I meant
that I liked the "inner" and "outer" names better than "tag[0]" and
"tag[1]".
I did notice that the inner and outer parameters could be
removed from bond_arp_send as well, but, again, I found the "inner" and
"outer" names more descriptive than tag[0] or tag[1]; perhaps a #define
for the magic numbers (0 = "outer", 1 = "inner" and 2 = "max nesting"),
or at least a comment that says straight up "tag[0] is the outer tag,
tag[1] is the inner tag (if there are two tags)" is in order.
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 114 ++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>index 9d08e00..f592f96 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>@@ -2126,8 +2126,7 @@ static bool bond_has_this_ip(struct bonding *bond, __be32 ip)
> */
> static void bond_arp_send(struct net_device *slave_dev, int arp_op,
> __be32 dest_ip, __be32 src_ip,
>- struct bond_vlan_tag *inner,
>- struct bond_vlan_tag *outer)
>+ struct bond_vlan_tag *tags)
> {
> struct sk_buff *skb;
>
>@@ -2141,12 +2140,12 @@ static void bond_arp_send(struct net_device *slave_dev, int arp_op,
> net_err_ratelimited("ARP packet allocation failed\n");
> return;
> }
>- if (outer->vlan_id) {
>- if (inner->vlan_id) {
>+ if (tags[0].vlan_id) {
>+ if (tags[1].vlan_id) {
> pr_debug("inner tag: proto %X vid %X\n",
>- ntohs(inner->vlan_proto), inner->vlan_id);
>- skb = __vlan_put_tag(skb, inner->vlan_proto,
>- inner->vlan_id);
>+ ntohs(tags[1].vlan_proto), tags[1].vlan_id);
>+ skb = __vlan_put_tag(skb, tags[1].vlan_proto,
>+ tags[1].vlan_id);
> if (!skb) {
> net_err_ratelimited("failed to insert inner VLAN tag\n");
> return;
>@@ -2154,8 +2153,8 @@ static void bond_arp_send(struct net_device *slave_dev, int arp_op,
> }
>
> pr_debug("outer reg: proto %X vid %X\n",
>- ntohs(outer->vlan_proto), outer->vlan_id);
>- skb = vlan_put_tag(skb, outer->vlan_proto, outer->vlan_id);
>+ ntohs(tags[0].vlan_proto), tags[0].vlan_id);
>+ skb = vlan_put_tag(skb, tags[0].vlan_proto, tags[0].vlan_id);
> if (!skb) {
> net_err_ratelimited("failed to insert outer VLAN tag\n");
> return;
>@@ -2164,22 +2163,52 @@ static void bond_arp_send(struct net_device *slave_dev, int arp_op,
> arp_xmit(skb);
> }
>
>+/* Check to make sure that @end device is stacked on top of the @start
>+ * device. Invofrmation about any intervening vlans are saved into
>+ * the @tag array. @idx parametet specifies how many vlans deep we are
>+ * are currently looking. We currently only support 2 levels of vlan stacking.
>+ * Return true if we have a valid stacking configuration. Otherwise false.
>+ */
Spelling nits: "Information" and "parameter".
>+static bool bond_check_path(struct net_device *start, struct net_device *end,
>+ struct bond_vlan_tag *tag, int idx)
>+{
>+ struct net_device *upper;
>+ struct list_head *iter;
>+
>+ /* We do not support more then 2 levels of VLAN nesting */
>+ if (idx >= 2)
>+ return false;
>+
>+ netdev_for_each_all_upper_dev_rcu(start, upper, iter) {
>+ if (is_vlan_dev(upper)) {
>+ tag[idx].vlan_proto = vlan_dev_vlan_proto(upper);
>+ tag[idx].vlan_id = vlan_dev_vlan_id(upper);
>+ }
>+ if (upper == end)
>+ return true;
>+
>+ /* Look at the devices list of 'upper' only if it is a
>+ * vlan device.
>+ */
>+ if (is_vlan_dev(upper) &&
>+ bond_check_path(upper, end, tag, idx+1))
>+ return true;
This may or may not be a realistic configuration, but will this
function traverse correctly if there is some other device type between
the two vlans? E.g., eth0 -> bond0 -> vlan100 -> bridge -> vlan200,
where "vlan200" is the "end" device holding the IP address from the
route lookup. It need not be a bridge in there, but I think this would
be a legal configuration.
-J
>+ }
>+ return false;
>+}
>+
>
> static void bond_arp_send_all(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *slave)
> {
>- struct net_device *upper, *vlan_upper;
>- struct list_head *iter, *vlan_iter;
> struct rtable *rt;
>- struct bond_vlan_tag inner, outer;
>+ struct bond_vlan_tag tags[2];
> __be32 *targets = bond->params.arp_targets, addr;
> int i;
>+ bool ret;
>
> for (i = 0; i < BOND_MAX_ARP_TARGETS && targets[i]; i++) {
> pr_debug("basa: target %pI4\n", &targets[i]);
>- inner.vlan_proto = 0;
>- inner.vlan_id = 0;
>- outer.vlan_proto = 0;
>- outer.vlan_id = 0;
>+ memset(tags, 0, sizeof(tags));
>
> /* Find out through which dev should the packet go */
> rt = ip_route_output(dev_net(bond->dev), targets[i], 0,
>@@ -2192,7 +2221,8 @@ static void bond_arp_send_all(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *slave)
> net_warn_ratelimited("%s: no route to arp_ip_target %pI4 and arp_validate is set\n",
> bond->dev->name,
> &targets[i]);
>- bond_arp_send(slave->dev, ARPOP_REQUEST, targets[i], 0, &inner, &outer);
>+ bond_arp_send(slave->dev, ARPOP_REQUEST, targets[i],
>+ 0, tags);
> continue;
> }
>
>@@ -2201,52 +2231,12 @@ static void bond_arp_send_all(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *slave)
> goto found;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
>- /* first we search only for vlan devices. for every vlan
>- * found we verify its upper dev list, searching for the
>- * rt->dst.dev. If found we save the tag of the vlan and
>- * proceed to send the packet.
>- */
>- netdev_for_each_all_upper_dev_rcu(bond->dev, vlan_upper,
>- vlan_iter) {
>- if (!is_vlan_dev(vlan_upper))
>- continue;
>-
>- if (vlan_upper == rt->dst.dev) {
>- outer.vlan_proto = vlan_dev_vlan_proto(vlan_upper);
>- outer.vlan_id = vlan_dev_vlan_id(vlan_upper);
>- rcu_read_unlock();
>- goto found;
>- }
>- netdev_for_each_all_upper_dev_rcu(vlan_upper, upper,
>- iter) {
>- if (upper == rt->dst.dev) {
>- /* If the upper dev is a vlan dev too,
>- * set the vlan tag to inner tag.
>- */
>- if (is_vlan_dev(upper)) {
>- inner.vlan_proto = vlan_dev_vlan_proto(upper);
>- inner.vlan_id = vlan_dev_vlan_id(upper);
>- }
>- outer.vlan_proto = vlan_dev_vlan_proto(vlan_upper);
>- outer.vlan_id = vlan_dev_vlan_id(vlan_upper);
>- rcu_read_unlock();
>- goto found;
>- }
>- }
>- }
>-
>- /* if the device we're looking for is not on top of any of
>- * our upper vlans, then just search for any dev that
>- * matches, and in case it's a vlan - save the id
>- */
>- netdev_for_each_all_upper_dev_rcu(bond->dev, upper, iter) {
>- if (upper == rt->dst.dev) {
>- rcu_read_unlock();
>- goto found;
>- }
>- }
>+ ret = bond_check_path(bond->dev, rt->dst.dev, tags, 0);
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
>+ if (ret)
>+ goto found;
>+
> /* Not our device - skip */
> pr_debug("%s: no path to arp_ip_target %pI4 via rt.dev %s\n",
> bond->dev->name, &targets[i],
>@@ -2259,7 +2249,7 @@ found:
> addr = bond_confirm_addr(rt->dst.dev, targets[i], 0);
> ip_rt_put(rt);
> bond_arp_send(slave->dev, ARPOP_REQUEST, targets[i],
>- addr, &inner, &outer);
>+ addr, tags);
> }
> }
>
>--
>1.9.0
>
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
--
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