RE: [PATCH net-next] hv_netvsc: Increase delay for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE
From: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Date: 2016-02-03 16:42:53
Also in:
lkml
-----Original Message----- From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuznets@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 11:06 AM To: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com> Cc: davem@davemloft.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org; KY Srinivasan [off-list ref]; olaf@aepfle.de; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] hv_netvsc: Increase delay for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE Haiyang Zhang [off-list ref] writes:quoted
quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuznets@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 8:06 AM To: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com> Cc: davem@davemloft.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org; KY Srinivasan [off-list ref]; olaf@aepfle.de; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] hv_netvsc: Increase delay for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE Haiyang Zhang [off-list ref] writes:quoted
We simulates a link down period forRNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGEquoted
quoted
message toquoted
trigger DHCP renew. User daemons may need multiple seconds totriggerquoted
quoted
thequoted
link down event. (e.g. ifplugd: 5sec, network-manager: 4sec.) So update this link down period to 10 sec to properly trigger DHCP renew.I probably don't follow: why do we need sucha a delay? If (with real hardware) you plug network cable out and in one second you plug it in you'll get DHCP renewed, right? When I introduced RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE handling by emulating a pair of up/down events I put 2 second delay to make link_watch happy(asquoted
quoted
we only handle 1 event per second there) but 10 seconds sounds to much to me.In the test on Hyper-V, our software on host side wants to trigger DHCP renew by sending only a RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE message to a guest without physically unplug the cable. But, this message didn't trigger DHCP renew within 2 seconds. The VM is Centos 7.1 usingNetworkmanager,quoted
which needs 4 seconds after link down to renew IP. Some daemon, like ifplugd, needs 5 sec to renew. That's why we increase the simulated link down time for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE message.Yes, I understand the motivation but sorry if I was unclear with my question. I meant to say that with physical network adapters it's possible to trigger same two events by plugging your cable out and then plugging it back in and it is certailnly doable in less than 10 seconds. NetworkManager or whoever is supposed to handle these events and we don't really care how fast -- I think that 4 or 5 seconds mentioned above is just an observation.
(forgot mailing lists in my last reply.... re-sending...) Our test failed (i.e. not triggering DHCP renew) with existing 2sec delay. According to the ifplugd man page, it ignores link down time <5sec: http://linux.die.net/man/8/ifplugd -d | --delay-down= SECS Specify delay for deconfiguring interface (default: 5) Networkmanager also has a waiting period (4sec). Thanks, - Haiyang