netdev - Re: [PATCH next v3 2/6] bonding: implement bond_poll

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAF2d9ji+mCGiDqpVMMVkn4x8O+0xqcT-U1kMkmvv4SKrnieEEg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Feb 2015 08:09:15 -0800
From:	Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
	Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Maciej Zenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v3 2/6] bonding: implement bond_poll_controller()

On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Jay Vosburgh
<jay.vosburgh@...onical.com> wrote:
> Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
>>wrote:
> [...]
>>    >+ if (BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_8023AD)
>>    >+ if (bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info(bond, &ad_info))
>>    >+ return;
>>    >+
>>    >+ bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, iter) {
>>    >+ ops = slave->dev->netdev_ops;
>>    >+ if (!bond_slave_is_up(slave) || !ops->ndo_poll_controller)
>>    >+ continue;
>>    >+
>>    >+ if (BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_8023AD) {
>>    >+ struct aggregator *agg =
>>    >+ SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave)->port.aggregator;
>>    >+
>>    >+ if (agg && agg->aggregator_identifier !=
>>    >+ ad_info.aggregator_id)
>>    >+ continue;
>>    >+ if (!bond_3ad_port_is_active(slave) || ad_info.ports != 1)
>>    >+ continue;
>>
>>
>>    The above will exclude slaves that are in an aggregator with
>>    more than one member, which is likely to be the usual case. Is that
>>    intentional?
>>
>>
>>
>>The idea is to use all the ports in the aggregator. In a situation where
>>there is only one port but is not active, then *only* use it. So from that
>>perspective this logic needs '&&' instead of '||'.
>
>         If you want to use any port from the active aggregator, then I
> think logic to first find the active agg, then cycle through its ports
> would be better.  This would also eliminate the concern from your other
> reply regarding the following:
>
>> >+static int bond_3ad_port_operational(struct slave *slave)
>> >+{
>> >+      port_t *port = &SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave)->port;
>> >+
>> >+      return bond_slave_can_tx(slave) &&
>> >+             (port->actor_oper_port_state & port->partner_oper.port_state &
>> >+              BOND_3AD_PORT_OPERATIONAL) == BOND_3AD_PORT_OPERATIONAL;
>> >+}
>
>         needing to test the port_state; if the logic cycles through the
> ports of the active aggregator, then it shouldn't need to check the
> state.  Any port in the active aggregator should be able to transmit,
> even if it is in the "no LACP peer" fallback situation (with one
> exception, noted below).
>
>         I think something like:
>
>         first_slave = bond_first_slave_rcu(bond);
>         agg = __get_active_agg(&(SLAVE_AD_INFO(first_slave)->aggregator));
>         for (port = agg->lag_ports; port;
>              port = port->next_port_in_aggregator) {
>                 if (bond_slave_can_tx(port->slave))
>                         /* use this one */
>         }
>
>         would do roughly what you're describing, although it will always
> choose the first available port of the active aggregator, even if there
> are more than one.
>
Thanks Jay for the suggestion. I think selecting one (first available
slave) is not sufficient since the xmit code path will determine
(based on the hash) which slave to select for the xmit. So in
poll_controller we've to prep all the slaves that are capable of xmit.

I'll replace is_port_operational() with slave_can_tx() check and keep
the remaining logic that covers remaining modes. That way we can have
one poll_controller() for all modes.

--mahesh..


>         Generally, slaves that are not up will not remain in the active
> aggregator, but the slave_can_tx test will cover the window between when
> a slave goes carrier down and the 3ad logic removes it from the active
> agg.
>
>         -J
>
> ---
>         -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