[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [PATCH] network: drop use of dummy tap device in bridges

On 9/3/20 10:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 10:56:25AM -0400, Laine Stump wrote:
On 9/3/20 9:34 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
A long time ago we introduced a dummy tap device (e.g. virbr0-nic) that
we attached to the bridge device created for virtual networks:

    commit 5754dbd56d4738112a86776c09e810e32f7c3224
    Author: Laine Stump <laine redhat com>
    Date:   Wed Feb 9 03:28:12 2011 -0500

      Give each virtual network bridge its own fixed MAC address

This was a hack to workaround a Linux kernel bug where it would not
honour any attempt to set a MAC address on a bridge. Instead the
bridge would adopt the numerically lowest MAC address of all NICs
attached to the bridge. This lead to the MAC addrss of the bridge
changing over time as NICs were attached/detached.

The Linux bug was actually fixed 3 years before the libvirt
workaround was added in:

    commit 92c0574f11598c8036f81e27d2e8bdd6eed7d76d
    Author: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger vyatta com>
    Date:   Tue Jun 17 16:10:06 2008 -0700

      bridge: make bridge address settings sticky

      Normally, the bridge just chooses the smallest mac address as the
      bridge id and mac address of bridge device. But if the administrator
      has explictly set the interface address then don't change it.

      Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger vyatta com>
      Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem davemloft net>

but libvirt needed to support RHEL-5 kernels at that time, so
none the less added the workaround.

We have long since dropped support for RHEL-5 vintage distros,
so there's no reason to keep the dummy tap device for the purpose
of setting the bridge MAC address.

Later the dummy TAP device was used for a second purpose related
to IPv6 DAD (Duplicate Address Detection) in:

    commit db488c79173b240459c7754f38c3c6af9b432970
    Author: Benjamin Cama <benoar dolka fr>
    Date:   Wed Sep 26 21:02:20 2012 +0200

      network: fix dnsmasq/radvd binding to IPv6 on recent kernels

This was again dealing with a regression in the Linux kernel, where
if there were no devices attached to the bridge in the UP state,
IPv6 DAD would not be performed. The virbr0-nic was attached but
in the DOWN state, so the above libvirt fix tenporarily brought
the NIC online. The Linux commit causing the problem was in v2.6.38

    commit 1faa4356a3bd89ea11fb92752d897cff3a20ec0e
    Author: stephen hemminger <shemminger vyatta com>
    Date:   Mon Mar 7 08:34:06 2011 +0000

      bridge: control carrier based on ports online

A short while later Linux was tweaked so that DAD would still occur
if the bridge had no attached devices at all in 3.1:

    commit b64b73d7d0c480f75684519c6134e79d50c1b341
    Author: stephen hemminger <shemminger vyatta com>
    Date:   Mon Oct 3 18:14:45 2011 +0000

      bridge: leave carrier on for empty bridge

IOW, the only reason we need the DAD hack of bringing virbr0-nic
online is because virbr0-nic exists. Once it doesn't exist, then
we hit the "empty bridge" case which works in Linux.

Ooh, cool! Having it used for DAD was the only reason I didn't remove
virbrX-nic after I put in the patch to set the bridge MAC directly:

commit 13ec827052fcd79a4350f499aab5f4aa20ea83fa
Author: Laine Stump <laine redhat com>
Date:   Thu Oct 17 21:12:30 2019 -0400

     util: set bridge device MAC address explicitly during

(I even comment about this, but didn't dig down to learn that it was no
longer required for DAD - I just thought that was the way bridges + DAD were
designed to work).

Nice detective work! Did some problem lead you to this, or did you just get
tired of always seeing that useless device hanging around?

The bug report from a user mentioned in the commit message prompted it

Sigh. Only one cup of coffee so far...

Reviewed-by: Laine Stump <laine redhat com>

(I give this assuming the veracity of all the info you've cited.)

One thing that comes to mind - do we still need to wait for DAD to finish in
networkStartNetworkVirtual(). I think maybe we were waiting for that only so
that we could set the dummy interface offline (there might be some other
reason I'm not thinking of though).

I'm not sure, and I don't currently have an IPv6 deployment to test
this, so I'm loathe to touch it myself. Perhaps someone else can do the
change and validate it though...

Well, I have IPv6 running on my internal network, and my ISP connection has IPv6 connectivity, and I usually have at least one libvirt network using IPv6. But I'm never really sure what to look for to make sure that something is working for everyone, and not just me :-)

Based on you saying you don't have an IPv6 deployment to test, I guess maybe I should install a build with this patch and match I can do some rudimentary things with it...

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]