On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 11:50:28AM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 08:50 +0000, Olivier Cherrier wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 08:09:51PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 18:16 +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > > On 15/09/16(Thu) 14:58, Olivier Cherrier wrote: > > > > > # for i in oce0 oce1 trunk0 vlan20; do > > > > > trunk0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > > > > > hwfeatures=10000<> hardmtu 1500 > > > > ^^^^^^ > > > > > > > > Why your trunk(4) does not have VLAN_MTU? That might be the bug. > > > > > > > > > > Indeed. > > > When he does "trunkport oce0 trunkport oce1 trunkproto loadbalance" > > > in this order, the roundrobin (default) trunk is created and then > > > it's changed to the loadbalancing one as the last step. The problem > > > is that the trunk discipline attach function clears tr_capabilities > > > and we need to manualy run the function that fetches the right value. > > > The workaround is to do "trunkproto loadbalance trunkport oce0 > > > trunkport oce1". > > > > > > I think I have introduced this bug in Varazdin... > > > > > > diff --git sys/net/if_trunk.c sys/net/if_trunk.c > > > index 7b30193..5b67db2 100644 > > > --- sys/net/if_trunk.c > > > +++ sys/net/if_trunk.c > > > @@ -662,8 +662,7 @@ trunk_ioctl(struct ifnet *ifp, u_long cmd, caddr_t > > > data) > > > error = tr->tr_detach(tr); > > > if (error != 0) > > > break; > > > - for (i = 0; i < (sizeof(trunk_protos) / > > > - sizeof(trunk_protos[0])); i++) { > > > + for (i = 0; i < nitems(trunk_protos); i++) { > > > if (trunk_protos[i].ti_proto == ra->ra_proto) { > > > if (tr->tr_ifflags & IFF_DEBUG) > > > printf("%s: using proto %u\n", > > > @@ -675,6 +674,8 @@ trunk_ioctl(struct ifnet *ifp, u_long cmd, caddr_t > > > data) > > > SLIST_FOREACH(tp, &tr->tr_ports, tp_entries) > > > if_ih_insert(tp->tp_if, > > > trunk_input, tp); > > > + /* Update trunk capabilities */ > > > + tr->tr_capabilities = trunk_capabilities(tr); > > > goto out; > > > } > > > } > > > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > Yes, your patch solved it. That's great ;-) > > > > Thanks for testing, but I'd like to know what's going on with oce > (if anything at all). Can you please back my oce diff out and verify > that there's no problem with the driver. Hi Mike,
I confirm you the oce's patch is not needed anymore. Thank you Best oc
