Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: B53 DSA switch problem on Banana Pi-R1 on Fedora 26 - systemd-networkd problem | From | Gerhard Wiesinger <> | Date | Mon, 28 May 2018 07:32:10 +0200 |
| |
On 27.05.2018 22:31, Florian Fainelli wrote: > Le 05/27/18 à 12:01, Gerhard Wiesinger a écrit : >> On 24.05.2018 08:22, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >>> On 24.05.2018 07:29, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >>>> After some analysis with Florian (thnx) we found out that the current >>>> implementation is broken: >>>> >>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/836538/ >>>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/c499696e7901bda18385ac723b7bd27c3a4af624#diff-a2b6f8d89e18de600e873ac3ac43fa1d >>>> >>>> >>>> Florians comment: >>>> >>>> c499696e7901bda18385ac723b7bd27c3a4af624 ("net: dsa: b53: Stop using >>>> dev->cpu_port incorrectly") since it would result in no longer setting >>>> the CPU port as tagged for a specific VLAN. Easiest way for you right >>>> now is to just revert it, but this needs some more thoughts for a proper >>>> upstream change. I will think about it some more. >>> Can confirm 4.14.18-200.fc26.armv7hl works, 4.15.x should be broken. >>> >>> # Kernel 4.14.x ok >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/log/drivers/net/dsa/b53?h=v4.14.43 >>> >>> # Kernel 4.15.x should be NOT ok >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/log/drivers/net/dsa/b53?h=v4.15.18 >>> >> Kernel 4.14.18-300.fc27.armv7hl works well so far, even with FC28 >> update. Florian send me a patch to try for 4.16.x > So does my patch make 4.16 work correctly for you now? If so, can I just > submit it and copy you? > >> I got the commands below to work with manual script commands. >> Afterwards I wrote systemd-networkd config where I've a strage problem >> when IPv6 sends a multicast broadcast from another machine to the bridge >> this will be sent back via the network interface, but with the source >> MAC of the bridge of the other machine. dmesg from the other machine: >> [117768.330444] br0: received packet on lan0 with own address as source >> address (addr:a0:36:9f:ab:cd:ef, vlan:0) >> [117768.334887] br0: received packet on lan0 with own address as source >> address (addr:a0:36:9f:ab:cd:ef, vlan:0) >> [117768.339281] br0: received packet on lan0 with own address as source >> address (addr:a0:36:9f:ab:cd:ef, vlan:0) >> >> And: If I just enter this command after e.g. a systemd-network restart >> everything is fine forever: >> # Not OK (dmesg message above is triggered on a remote computer, whole >> switching network gets unstable, ssh terminals close, packet loss, etc.) >> systemctl restart systemd-networkd >> # OK again when this command is entered >> bridge vlan add dev wan vid 102 pvid untagged >> >> brctl show, ip link, bridge vlan, bridge link commands, etc. look all >> the same, also /sys/class/net/br0/bridge, /sys/class/net/br1/bridge >> settings >> >> Systemd config correct? >> Any ideas? > You should not have eth0.101 and eth0.102 to be enslaved in a bridge at > all, this is what is causing the bridge to be confused. Remember what I > wrote to you before, with the current b53 driver that does not have any > tagging enabled the lanX interfaces and brX interfaces are only used for > control and should not be used for passing any data. The only network > device that will be passing data is eth0, which is why we need to set-up > VLAN interfaces to pop/push the VLAN id accordingly. > > I have no idea why manual vs. systemd does not work but you can most > certainly troubleshoot that by comparing the bridge/ip outputs.
So is that then the correct structure?
br1 - lan1 (with VID 101) - lan2 (with VID 101) - lan3 (with VID 101) - lan4 (with VID 101)
brlan - eth0.101 - wlan0 (currently not active, could be optimized without bridge but for future comfort)
br2 - wan (with VID 102) (could be optimized without bridge but for future comfort) - future1
brwan - eth0.102 (could be optimized without bridge but for future comfort) - future2
Ad systemd vs. manual config: As I said I didn't find any difference in the bridge/ip outputs. As they are broken (see other message) maybe something else is broken, too.
Thnx.
Ciao, Gerhard
| |