On 29/10/2019 23:03, Eric Dumazet wrote:

On 10/29/19 11:35 AM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:

quoted

Hi Matteo,
Wouldn't it be more useful and simpler to use some field to choose the slave (override the hash
completely) in a deterministic way from user-space ?
For example the mark can be interpreted as a slave id in the bonding (should be
optional, to avoid breaking existing setups). ping already supports -m and
anything else can set it, this way it can be used to do monitoring for a specific
slave with any protocol and would be a much simpler change.
User-space can then implement any logic for the monitoring case and as a minor bonus
can monitor the slaves in parallel. And the opposite as well - if people don't want
these balanced for some reason, they wouldn't enable it.

I kind of agree giving user more control. But I do not believe we need to use the mark
(this might be already used by other layers)

TCP uses sk->sk_hash to feed skb->hash.

Anything using skb_set_owner_w() is also using sk->sk_hash if set.

So presumably we could add a generic SO_TXHASH socket option to let user space
read/set this field.

Right, I was just giving it as an example. Your suggestion sounds much better and
wouldn't interfere with other layers, plus we already use skb->hash in bond_xmit_hash()
and skb_set_owner_w() sets l4_hash if txhash is present which is perfect.

One thing - how do we deal with sk_rethink_txhash() ? I guess we'll need some way to
signal that the user specified the txhash and it is not to be recomputed ?
That can also be used to avoid the connect txhash set as well if SO_TXHASH was set prior
to the connect. It's quite late here, I'll look into it more tomorrow. :)

Thanks,
 Nik