Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 02:40:43PM CET, dada1@cosmosbay.com wrote:

Jiri Pirko a écrit :

quoted

(resend)

Hi all.

The problem is described in following bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487763

Basically here's what's going on. In every mode, bonding interface uses the same
mac address for all enslaved devices. Except for mode balance-alb. When you put
this kind of bond device into a bridge it will only add one of mac adresses into
a hash list of mac addresses, say X. This mac address is marked as local. But
this bonding interface also has mac address Y. Now then packet arrives with
destination address Y, this address is not marked as local and the packed looks
like it needs to be forwarded. This packet is then lost which is wrong.

Notice that interfaces can be added and removed from bond while it is in bridge.

This patch solves the situation in the bonding without touching bridge code,
as Patrick suggested. For every incoming frame to bonding it searches the
destination address in slaves list and if any of slave addresses matches, it
rewrites the address in frame by the adress of bonding master. This ensures that
all frames comming thru the bonding in alb mode have the same address.

Jirka


Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <redacted>

diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
index 27fb7f5..2838be0 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c

@@ -1762,6 +1762,26 @@ int bond_alb_set_mac_address(struct net_device *bond_dev, void *addr)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+void bond_alb_change_dest(struct sk_buff *skb)
+{
+	struct net_device *bond_dev = skb->dev;
+	struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
+	unsigned char *dest = eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest;
+	struct slave *slave;
+	int i;
+
+	if (!memcmp(dest, bond_dev->dev_addr, ETH_ALEN))
+		return;
+	read_lock(&bond->lock);

Its a pity bonding doesnt use RCU and needs this read_lock(&bond->lock)

Sure it is...

quoted

+	bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, i) {
+		if (!memcmp(slave->dev->dev_addr, dest, ETH_ALEN)) {

compare_ether_addr() (or even better compare_ether_addr_64bits()) instead of memcmp() ?

Okay, I'll use compare_ether_addr_64bits and do the repost later on...

quoted

+			memcpy(dest, bond_dev->dev_addr, ETH_ALEN);
+			break;
+		}
+	}
+	read_unlock(&bond->lock);
+}
+