On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 06:17:45PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 04:55:01PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 02:02:04PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 03:31:46PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Jarod Wilson <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 07:31:53AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > > > >> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Jarod Wilson <ja...@redhat.com> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > I've got a bug report about an e1000e interface, where a vlan > > > > >> > interface is > > > > >> > set up on top of it: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > $ ip link add link ens1f0 name ens1f0.99 type vlan id 99 > > > > >> > $ ip link set ens1f0 up > > > > >> > $ ip link set ens1f0.99 up > > > > >> > $ ip addr add 192.168.99.92 dev ens1f0.99 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > At this point, I can ping another host on vlan 99, ip > > > > >> > 192.168.99.91. > > > > >> > However, if I do the following: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > $ ethtool -K ens1f0 rxvlan off > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Then no traffic passes on ens1f0.99. It comes back if I toggle > > > > >> > rxvlan on > > > > >> > again. I'm not sure if this is actually intended behavior, or if > > > > >> > there's a > > > > >> > lack of software vlan stripping fallback, or what, but things > > > > >> > continue to > > > > >> > work if I simply don't call e1000e_vlan_strip_disable() if there > > > > >> > are > > > > >> > active vlans (plagiarizing a function from the e1000 driver here) > > > > >> > on the > > > > >> > interface. ... > > Okay, so rxvlan is *supposed* to only impact the rx path, right? It's > > looking like it is actually impacting the tx path too here. I actually > > *do* see calls to skb_vlan_untag with rxvlan off, if I ping from an > > external host, so it seems only the packets from the host with rxvlan > > toggled off aren't escaping correctly for some reason. > > And this leads me to believe maybe the bit in the e1000 driver that > mentions explicitly that the hardware has no support for separate RX/TX > vlan accel toggling rings true for e1000e as well, and thus both > NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_CTAG_RX and NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_CTAG_TX need to be kept in > sync. Testing this theory out shortly...
We have a winner. If I make sure the TX flag gets toggled too, ping continues to work after disabling rxvlan. $ ping 192.168.99.91 PING 192.168.99.91 (192.168.99.91) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.99.91: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.591 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.99.91: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.335 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.99.91: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.417 ms ^C --- 192.168.99.91 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2000ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.335/0.447/0.591/0.109 ms $ sudo ethtool -K ens1f0 rxvlan off Actual changes: rx-vlan-offload: off tx-vlan-offload: off [requested on] $ ping 192.168.99.91 PING 192.168.99.91 (192.168.99.91) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.99.91: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.327 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.99.91: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.393 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.99.91: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.424 ms ^C --- 192.168.99.91 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 1999ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.327/0.381/0.424/0.043 ms I'll clean things up and submit a patch tonight or tomorrow. -- Jarod Wilson ja...@redhat.com