Thread (23 messages) 23 messages, 4 authors, 2009-03-19

Re: Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6

From: Jesper Krogh <hidden>
Date: 2008-11-19 07:53:37

Hi Jay.

You're right. I misconfigured the static setup while moving it for 
testing and I moved the misconfiguration back to the dynamic setup. I'll 
make another response to the same message trying to fill in the 
questions while having it configured correctly.

Jesper

Jay Vosburgh wrote:
Jesper Krogh [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Jay Vosburgh wrote:
[...]
quoted
quoted
	What exactly does "doesn't get up" mean? 
Looks like this:
# ifconfig bond0
bond0     Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1e:68:57:82:b2
         inet6 addr: fe80::21e:68ff:fe57:82b2/64 Scope:Link
         UP BROADCAST RUNNING MASTER MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
         RX packets:74 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
         TX packets:17 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
         collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
         RX bytes:5952 (5.8 KB)  TX bytes:1900 (1.8 KB)

(usually this would have been assigned an ip-address using dhcp, does that
with 2.6.26.8, with the same configuration). Manually running dhclient on
the interface doesn't bring it up either.
	For this case, when there's a non-zero HWaddr assigned, what is
in /proc/net/bonding/bond0 and what bonding related messages are in
dmesg or /var/log/messages?
[...]
quoted
Booting up with static ip configuration it looks like this:

# ifconfig
bond0     Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00 

         inet addr:10.194.132.90  Bcast:10.194.133.255 Mask:255.255.254.0
         UP BROADCAST MASTER MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1 
         RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 
         TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 
         collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 
         RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)

Apparently correct, but absolutely no traffic can go through the interface.
	This is different, and not correct: there's no HWaddr.  That
probably means there are no slaves.  This is most likely a totally
separate problem; the first information suggests that the bond has
slaves, but isn't working; this suggests that the bond has no slaves
(which is why it won't work).
quoted
Configured with a static ip. ifconfig claims that the interface is up and
configured with the ip-address.

# cat /proc/net/bonding/bond0
Ethernet Channel Bonding Driver: v3.3.0 (June 10, 2008)

Bonding Mode: IEEE 802.3ad Dynamic link aggregation
Transmit Hash Policy: layer2 (0)
MII Status: down
MII Polling Interval (ms): 100
Up Delay (ms): 0
Down Delay (ms): 0

802.3ad info
LACP rate: slow
bond bond0 has no active aggregator

# ifconfig bond0
bond0     Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:00:00:00:00:00
         inet addr:10.194.132.90  Bcast:10.194.133.255  Mask:255.255.254.0
         UP BROADCAST MASTER MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
         RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
         TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
         collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
         RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
	As with the prior information, the above indicates that there
are no slaves attached to the bond.  There's no HWaddr, and the
/proc/net/bonding/bond0 lists no slaves.

	For this case (bonding HWaddr all zeros), what does dmesg or
/var/log/messages list for bonding?  This is most likely some kind of
configuration problem causing no interfaces to be enslaved.

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com
  
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help