Date:   Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:31:25 -0400
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     si-wei liu <si-wei.liu@...cle.com>
Cc:     "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        stephen@...workplumber.org, davem@...emloft.net, kubakici@...pl,
        alexander.duyck@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        liran.alon@...cle.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
        vijay.balakrishna@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] failover: allow name change on IFF_UP slave
 interfaces

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 12:50:25PM -0700, si-wei liu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/28/2019 10:55 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 3/28/2019 4:47 PM, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
> > > When a netdev appears through hot plug then gets enslaved by a failover
> > > master that is already up and running, the slave will be opened
> > > right away after getting enslaved. Today there's a race that userspace
> > > (udev) may fail to rename the slave if the kernel (net_failover)
> > > opens the slave earlier than when the userspace rename happens.
> > > Unlike bond or team, the primary slave of failover can't be renamed by
> > > userspace ahead of time, since the kernel initiated auto-enslavement is
> > > unable to, or rather, is never meant to be synchronized with the rename
> > > request from userspace.
> > > 
> > > As the failover slave interfaces are not designed to be operated
> > > directly by userspace apps: IP configuration, filter rules with
> > > regard to network traffic passing and etc., should all be done on master
> > > interface. In general, userspace apps only care about the
> > > name of master interface, while slave names are less important as long
> > > as admin users can see reliable names that may carry
> > > other information describing the netdev. For e.g., they can infer that
> > > "ens3nsby" is a standby slave of "ens3", while for a
> > > name like "eth0" they can't tell which master it belongs to.
> > > 
> > > Historically the name of IFF_UP interface can't be changed because
> > > there might be admin script or management software that is already
> > > relying on such behavior and assumes that the slave name can't be
> > > changed once UP. But failover is special: with the in-kernel
> > > auto-enslavement mechanism, the userspace expectation for device
> > > enumeration and bring-up order is already broken. Previously initramfs
> > > and various userspace config tools were modified to bypass failover
> > > slaves because of auto-enslavement and duplicate MAC address. Similarly,
> > > in case that users care about seeing reliable slave name, the new type
> > > of failover slaves needs to be taken care of specifically in userspace
> > > anyway.
> > > 
> > > It's less risky to lift up the rename restriction on failover slave
> > > which is already UP. Although it's possible this change may potentially
> > > break userspace component (most likely configuration scripts or
> > > management software) that assumes slave name can't be changed while
> > > UP, it's relatively a limited and controllable set among all userspace
> > > components, which can be fixed specifically to listen for the rename
> > > and/or link down/up events on failover slaves. Userspace component
> > > interacting with slaves is expected to be changed to operate on failover
> > > master interface instead, as the failover slave is dynamic in nature
> > > which may come and go at any point.  The goal is to make the role of
> > > failover slaves less relevant, and userspace components should only
> > > deal with failover master in the long run.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 30c8bd5aa8b2 ("net: Introduce generic failover module")
> > > Signed-off-by: Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu@...cle.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > v1 -> v2:
> > > - Drop configurable module parameter (Sridhar)
> > > 
> > > v2 -> v3:
> > > - Drop additional IFF_SLAVE_RENAME_OK flag (Sridhar)
> > > - Send down and up events around rename (Michael S. Tsirkin)
> > > 
> > > v3 -> v4:
> > > - Simplify notification to be sent (Stephen Hemminger)
> > > ---
> > >   net/core/dev.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > >   1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> > > index 722d50d..6ae5874 100644
> > > --- a/net/core/dev.c
> > > +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> > > @@ -1180,7 +1180,21 @@ int dev_change_name(struct net_device *dev,
> > > const char *newname)
> > >       BUG_ON(!dev_net(dev));
> > >         net = dev_net(dev);
> > > -    if (dev->flags & IFF_UP)
> > > +
> > > +    /* Allow failover slave to rename even when
> > > +     * it is up and running.
> > > +     *
> > > +     * Failover slaves are special, since userspace
> > > +     * might rename the slave after the interface
> > > +     * has been brought up and running due to
> > > +     * auto-enslavement.
> > > +     *
> > > +     * Failover users don't actually care about slave
> > > +     * name change, as they are only expected to operate
> > > +     * on master interface directly.
> > > +     */
> > > +    if (dev->flags & IFF_UP &&
> > > +        likely(!(dev->priv_flags & IFF_FAILOVER_SLAVE)))
> > >           return -EBUSY;
> > >         write_seqcount_begin(&devnet_rename_seq);
> > > @@ -1227,6 +1241,14 @@ int dev_change_name(struct net_device *dev,
> > > const char *newname)
> > >       hlist_add_head_rcu(&dev->name_hlist, dev_name_hash(net,
> > > dev->name));
> > >       write_unlock_bh(&dev_base_lock);
> > >   +    if (unlikely(dev->flags & IFF_UP)) {
> > > +        struct netdev_notifier_change_info change_info;
> > > +
> > > +        change_info.flags_changed = 0;
> > > +        call_netdevice_notifiers_info(NETDEV_CHANGE, dev,
> > > +                          &change_info.info);
> > 
> > This function no longer takes the dev parameter in the net-next kernel.
> OK. Will get my patch updated with the latest net-next tree.
> 
> > 
> > Did you consider calling netdev_state_change() although it does send a
> > RTM_NEWLINK message too. May be just fixing the notifier call should be
> > fine.
> I did look at it and the extra RTM_NEWLINK message was indeed the reason I
> got it rewritten. You see, how the way of initialization is inherited.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Siwei

More messages just increase the chance existing scripts will work.
Don't see what the harm is.

> > 
> > > +    }
> > > +
> > >       ret = call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGENAME, dev);
> > >       ret = notifier_to_errno(ret);
> > > 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists