Hi, after more testing of all matter related to two NIC on same net, I just updated my submit http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159601 The patch I send here yesterday must be updated too. IFA_RTSELF flag must be treat correctly on more places. The new patch is attached and commented output of my testing too. To achieve same testing result following patches must be used too: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159600 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159601 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159603 Svata On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Svatopluk Kraus <onwahe_at_gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for committing the fix. > > I've continued with work on two NIC on same NET. Now, with > point-to-point interfaces too and I have more small fixes which I > submitted today: > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159600 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159601 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159602 > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159603 > > I have one more related problem, but I'm not sure how complex the fix should be. > > When an interface is marked down a network route is deleted (or > replaced) and a loopback route persists in routing table. It is OK. > However, when an interface is marked up again, then a network route is > installed unconditionally (but error is ignored) and a loopbak route > is deleted and added immediately and unconditionally too. IMHO, it is > not correct behaviour. I think that a second half of in_ifinit() > should be here starting by in_addprefix() call with some small or > bigger changes. > > Maybe, adding network route and ignoring error could be OK, but > deleting loopback route should be done under IFA_RTSELF flag is set > condition (with existing route refcount check). V_useloopback should > be check before re-adding the route and existing route must be check > to evaluate refcount correctly. The proposed patch is attached. > > However, I prefer to call in_addprefix() (which is static now) instead > of rtinit() and add some more checks from in_ifinit(). Can you (or > anyone) review the patch? > > Thanks once again, > > Svata > > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Kevin Lo <kevlo_at_freebsd.org> wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> I just committed Svatopluk's fix to HEAD, thanks! >> >> Kevin >> >> On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 11:11 -0400, Andrew Boyer wrote: >>> We found and fixed a similar issue with an identical patch. It has been working fine for us under stable/8. >>> >>> Unfortunately I am weeks and weeks behind on pushing fixes back to the tree, so you had to duplicate the work. If it can be committed (and MFC'd to 8, please) it would save others the trouble. >>> >>> -Andrew >>> >>> On Aug 3, 2011, at 10:51 AM, Svatopluk Kraus wrote: >>> >>> > I have two NIC on same NET (both are up). If a NIC which installs >>> > network route is going down then an error happens during network route >>> > replacement (in_scrubprefix: err=17, new prefix add failed). >>> > >>> > I've done a little bit investigation. In rtinit1(), before >>> > rtrequest1_fib() is called, info.rti_flags is initialized by flags >>> > (function argument) or-ed with ifa->ifa_flags. Both NIC has a loopback >>> > route to itself, so IFA_RTSELF is set on ifa(s). As IFA_RTSELF is >>> > defined by RTF_HOST, rtrequest1_fib() is called with RTF_HOST flag >>> > even if netmask is not NULL. Consequently, netmask is set to zero in >>> > rtrequest1_fib(), and request to add network route is changed under >>> > hands to request to add host route. It is the reason of logged info >>> > and my problem. >>> > >>> > When I've done more investigation, it looks similar to >>> > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=201543. So, I >>> > propose the following patch. >>> > >>> > Index: sys/net/route.c >>> > =================================================================== >>> > --- sys/net/route.c (revision 224635) >>> > +++ sys/net/route.c (working copy) >>> > _at__at_ -1478,7 +1478,7 _at__at_ >>> > */ >>> > bzero((caddr_t)&info, sizeof(info)); >>> > info.rti_ifa = ifa; >>> > - info.rti_flags = flags | ifa->ifa_flags; >>> > + info.rti_flags = flags | (ifa->ifa_flags & ~IFA_RTSELF); >>> > info.rti_info[RTAX_DST] = dst; >>> > /* >>> > * doing this for compatibility reason >>> > >>> > >>> > Is the patch sufficient? >>> > >>> > Svata >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list >>> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >>> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------- >>> Andrew Boyer aboyer_at_averesystems.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" >> >> >> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:16 UTC