On 3/21/19 9:14 PM, Cole Robinson wrote:
On 3/19/19 8:46 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
src/libvirt_private.syms | 1 +
src/util/virnetdevtap.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
src/util/virnetdevtap.h | 12 +++++++
3 files changed, 82 insertions(+)
diff --git a/src/libvirt_private.syms b/src/libvirt_private.syms
index d9494a04bb..6f5a734fdb 100644
--- a/src/libvirt_private.syms
+++ b/src/libvirt_private.syms
@@ -2461,6 +2461,7 @@ virNetDevTapDelete;
virNetDevTapGetName;
virNetDevTapGetRealDeviceName;
virNetDevTapInterfaceStats;
+virNetDevTapReattachBridge;
# util/virnetdevveth.h
diff --git a/src/util/virnetdevtap.c b/src/util/virnetdevtap.c
index 972f3405aa..0484c7c5a4 100644
--- a/src/util/virnetdevtap.c
+++ b/src/util/virnetdevtap.c
@@ -553,6 +553,75 @@ virNetDevTapAttachBridge(const char *tapname,
}
+/**
+ * virNetDevTapReattachBridge:
+ * @tapname: the tap interface name (or name template)
+ * @brname: the bridge name
+ * @macaddr: desired MAC address
+ * @virtPortProfile: bridge/port specific configuration
+ * @virtVlan: vlan tag info
+ * @mtu: requested MTU for port (or 0 for "default")
+ * @actualMTU: MTU actually set for port (after accounting for bridge's MTU)
+ *
+ * Ensures that the tap device (@tapname) is connected to the bridge
+ * (@brname), potentially removing it from any existing bridge that
+ * does not match.
+ *
+ * Returns 0 in case of success or -1 on failure
+ */
+int
+virNetDevTapReattachBridge(const char *tapname,
+ const char *brname,
+ const virMacAddr *macaddr,
+ const unsigned char *vmuuid,
+ virNetDevVPortProfilePtr virtPortProfile,
+ virNetDevVlanPtr virtVlan,
+ unsigned int mtu,
+ unsigned int *actualMTU)
+{
+ bool useOVS = false;
+ char *master = NULL;
+
Could use VIR_AUTOFREE to simplify things a bit
+ if (virNetDevGetMaster(tapname, &master) < 0)
+ return -1;
+
+ /* IFLA_MASTER for a tap on an OVS switch is always "ovs-system" */
+ if (STREQ_NULLABLE(master, "ovs-system")) {
+ useOVS = true;
+ VIR_FREE(master);
+ if (virNetDevOpenvswitchInterfaceGetMaster(tapname, &master) < 0)
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ /* Nothing more todo if we're on the right bridge already */
+ if (STREQ_NULLABLE(brname, master))
+ return 0;
+
+ /* disconnect from current (incorrect) bridge, if any */
+ if (master) {
+ int ret;
+ VIR_INFO("Removing %s from %s", tapname, master);
+ if (useOVS)
+ ret = virNetDevOpenvswitchRemovePort(master, tapname);
+ else
+ ret = virNetDevBridgeRemovePort(master, tapname);
+ VIR_FREE(master);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return -1;
+ }
+
These were non-fatal in the original code. Is it okay to change?
I don't remember why I made those non-fatal in the original code.
Probably wanted to give as high a chance as possible of muddling through
even in the face of errors from ovs. But looking at the code again, I
agree that it's just as well to fail hard instead of ignoring the errors.
Provided there's an answer:
Reviewed-by: Cole Robinson <crobinso@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Cole
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
