Subject: Re: how to mix bridges and bonding inc. vlans correctly on Kernel > 3.10

From: Vlad Yasevich <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 12:21:04 -0500

On 11/13/2013 11:21 AM, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:17:33PM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
> wrote:
>> Am 13.11.2013 16:05, schrieb Vlad Yasevich:
>>> On 11/13/2013 09:20 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote:
>>>> Hi Falico,
>>>> Am 13.11.2013 15:12, schrieb Veaceslav Falico:
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 02:58:40PM +0100, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> while my vlans, bridging and bonding stuff was working until 3.9 i
>>>>>> never
>>>>>> thought about how it is right. So maybe i was always wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> eth2
>>>>>>      \
>>>>>>       -- bond1 -- vmbr1
>>>>>>      /
>>>>>> eth3
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This works fine and as expected now i want to have a vlan using the
>>>>>> bonding and using a bridge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I the past i had this:
>>>>>> eth2
>>>>>>      \
>>>>>>       -- bond1 -- vmbr1
>>>>>>      /              \
>>>>>> eth3                 \ vmbr1.3000
>>>>>>                            \ ---- tap114i1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This was working fine until 3.9.X since 3.10. Right now using 3.10 i
>>>>>> need to put eth2 and eth3 into promisc mode to get it working ;-(
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> is bad!
>>>>>
>>>>> As a guess - do you use arp monitoring for bonding? Try using miimon -
>>>>> there were some issues with it in 3.10, which were fixed by some huge
>>>>> patchsets that will never hit 3.10 stable.
>>>>> Also, the bonding configuration would be welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Debian Bonding konfiguration looks like this:
>>>> auto bond1
>>>> iface bond1 inet manual
>>>>          slaves eth2 eth3
>>>>          bond-mode 802.3ad
>>>>          bond_miimon 100
>>>>          bond_updelay 200
>>>>          bond_downdelay 0
>>>>
>>>> This should be miimon using lacp and not arp isn't it?
>>>> Anything more needed?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm..  With 802.3ad mode, when the bond is a port on the bridge, the
>>> bond should place all of its ports into promiscuous mode.  Do you see
>>> the the kernel messages that say that?
>>
>> No it does not - i only see:
>> # dmesg -c|egrep "promiscuous|forward"
>> [    5.445161] device bond0 entered promiscuous mode
>> [    7.670701] device bond1 entered promiscuous mode
>> [    7.845472] vmbr0: port 1(bond0) entered forwarding state
>> [    7.845474] vmbr0: port 1(bond0) entered forwarding state
>> [    8.269769] vmbr1: port 1(bond1) entered forwarding state
>> [    8.269771] vmbr1: port 1(bond1) entered forwarding state
>>
>> Now adding variant 1:
>> # dmesg -c|egrep "promiscuous|forward"
>> [   85.919382] device tap113i0 entered promiscuous mode
>> [   85.965018] vmbr0: port 2(tap113i0) entered forwarding state
>> [   85.965023] vmbr0: port 2(tap113i0) entered forwarding state
>> [   86.263292] device tap113i1 entered promiscuous mode
>> [   86.314151] device vmbr1.3000 entered promiscuous mode
>> [   86.314153] device vmbr1 entered promiscuous mode
>> [   86.314192] vmbr1v3000: port 1(vmbr1.3000) entered forwarding state
>> [   86.314196] vmbr1v3000: port 1(vmbr1.3000) entered forwarding state
>> [   86.318116] vmbr1v3000: port 2(tap113i1) entered forwarding state
>> [   86.318120] vmbr1v3000: port 2(tap113i1) entered forwarding state
>> [  101.382129] vmbr1v3000: port 1(vmbr1.3000) entered forwarding state
>>
>> Now it looks like this:
>> # ip a l|grep PROMISC
>> 13: tap113i0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc
>> htb master vmbr0 state UNKNOWN qlen 500
>> 14: tap113i1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,PROMISC,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc
>> htb master vmbr1v3000 state UNKNOWN qlen 500
>
> eth* should get into forwarding mode cause bond0 is a port of the bridge
> and should propagate its state towards its slaves. Something is wrong here.
>
> Maybe we're looking at the wrong direction - and the promisc for the
> ethernet drivers got broken?

I was able to duplicate Stefans results only when I turn off the link to
the underlying devices when building the bridge.  When the link is off,
the rx_flags do not propagate down to the lower level devices.

What about something like this (completely untested)

diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c 
b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
index 4dd5ee2..3051744 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
@@ -2863,6 +2863,17 @@ static int bond_slave_netdev_event(unsigned long 
event,
                         bond_release(bond_dev, slave_dev);
                 break;
         case NETDEV_UP:
+               /* If the bond was set to primisc, but slave has not due to
+                * slave being down when the command was issued, sync the
+                * state when the slave comes up.
+                */
+               if (bond_dev->flags & IFF_PROMISC && 
!slave_dev->promiscuity) {
+                       if (!USES_PRIMARY(bond))
+                               dev_set_promiscuity(slave_dev, 1);
+                       else if (slave == bond->curr_active_slave)
+                               dev_set_promiscuity(slave_dev, 1);
+               }
+
         case NETDEV_CHANGE:
                 old_speed = slave->speed;
                 old_duplex = slave->duplex;

-vlad
>
> What ethernet cards/driver do you use for eth*?
>
>>
>> Greets,
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>> Main question is - is this one correct:
>
> Both are correct. Here's my setup (sorry for stretching):
>
> +---------------+           +------------+
> +-------------+           +---------+           +------+
> |     bond1     |           |            |              |   bridge0
> |           |         |           |      |
> |  192.168.2.1  |  master   | bridge0.15 |  neighbour   | 192.168.3.1 |
> master   |  bond0  |  master   | eth2 |
> |               | --------> |            | ------------ | 192.168.4.1 |
> --------> |         | --------> |      |
> +---------------+           +------------+
> +-------------+           +---------+           +------+
>                                                                                      |
>                                                                                      | master
>                                                                                      v
> +---------------+
> +---------+
> |    dummy0
> |                                                                 |
> eth0   |
> +---------------+
> +---------+
>
> (disregard that dummy0).
>
> All 192.168.X.1 ips are pingable (via the correct vlans) on both
> net-next and stable 3.10.19.
>
>>>>>> eth2
>>>>>>      \
>>>>>>       -- bond1 -- vmbr1
>>>>>>      /              \
>>>>>> eth3                 \ vmbr1.3000
>>>>>>                            \ ---- tap114i1
>>
>> <= does not work at all
>>
>> or this one?:
>>>>>> eth2
>>>>>>      \
>>>>>>       -- bond1 -- vmbr1
>>>>>>      /     \
>>>>>> eth3        ----- bond1.3000 --- vmbr1v3000
>>>>>>                                      \ ---- tap114i1
>>
>> <= works if i manually put eth2 and eth3 into promiscous mode.
>>
>>> -vlad
>>>
>>>> One thing i forgot the one with vmbr1.3000 does not work at all eben
>>>> not
>>>> with promisc mode. The one below works fine if i set eth2 and eth3 into
>>>> promisc mode.
>>>>
>>>> Stefan
>>>>
>>>>>> I also tried this one without success:
>>>>>> eth2
>>>>>>      \
>>>>>>       -- bond1 -- vmbr1
>>>>>>      /     \
>>>>>> eth3        ----- bond1.3000 --- vmbr1v3000
>>>>>>                                      \ ---- tap114i1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greets,
>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>>>>> the body of a message to [email-masked]
>>>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>>> the body of a message to [email-masked]
>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>
>>>