Le samedi 01 janvier 2011 à 19:27 -0500, Jesse Gross a écrit :
quoted text
> On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Le mardi 14 décembre 2010 à 11:15 -0800, Matt Carlson a écrit :
> >
> >> Thanks for the comments Jesse.  Below is an updated patch.
> >>
> >> Michael, I'm wondering if the difference in behavior can be explained by
> >> the presence or absence of management firmware.  Can you look at the
> >> driver sign-on messages in your syslogs for ASF[]?  I'm half expecting
> >> the 5752 to show "ASF[0]" and the 5714 to show "ASF[1]".  If you see
> >> this, and the below patch doesn't fix the problem, let me know.  I have
> >> another test I'd like you to run.
> >>
> >> ----
> >>
> >> [PATCH] tg3: Use new VLAN code
> >>
> >> This patch pivots the tg3 driver to the new VLAN infrastructure.
> >> All references to vlgrp have been removed and all VLAN code is
> >> unconditionally active.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Matt Carlson <mcarlson@broadcom.com>
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Hi Matt.
> >
> > Any news on this patch ?
> >
> > Without it, net-next-2.6 doesnt work for me on a vlan setup on top of
> > bonding.
> >
> > (bond0 : eth1 & eth2, eth1 being bnx2, eth2 beging tg3)
> >
> > ip link add link bond0 vlan.103 type vlan id 103
> > ip addr add 192.168.20.110/24 dev vlan.103
> > ip link set vlan.103 up
> >
> >
> > If active slave is eth1 (bnx2), everything works, but if active slave is
> > eth2 (tg3), incoming tagged frames (on vlan 103) are lost.
> 
> This patch isn't quite right - it always disables vlan stripping
> unless management firmware is in use, so it's not really a correct
> fix.
> 
> You said that this used to work correctly on this NIC?  Does it work
> without a bond, just a vlan on the tg3 device?  It sounds like Michael
> has a problem with vlan stripping on one of his NICs but if it works
> with just a vlan or on older kernels, it's probably not the same
> thing.
> 

1) current linux-2.6 works OK for me (and previous versions as well, I
am using this vlan/bonding setup since 3 years or so on one of my dev
machine)

Only net-next-2.6 has the problem.

If I remove bonding of the equation, I still have the problem, and can
see the 'dropped' counter increasing while I send packets to eth2 (tg3)

$ ifconfig eth2
eth2      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1E:0B:92:78:50  
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:94 errors:0 dropped:38686 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:18 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 
          RX bytes:8332 (8.1 Kb)  TX bytes:1392 (1.3 Kb)
          Interrupt:19 
$ ifconfig vlan.103
vlan.103  Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1E:0B:92:78:50  
          inet addr:192.168.20.110  Bcast:0.0.0.0  Mask:255.255.255.0
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:15 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 
          RX bytes:0 (0.0 b)  TX bytes:846 (846.0 b)





quoted text
> If it works on bnx2, it would seem to be a driver problem but it would
> be good to confirm that the tag in skb->vlan_tci is not being
> delievered to the networking core in this case.

Hmm, where do you want me to check this ?


--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/