On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 10:05:07PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 06:50:43PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 05:10:34PM +0000, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 05:31:44PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 06:23:42PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 02:26:35PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > > > > > Debian has had support for configuring bridges at boot time via > > > > > > the interfaces file for years. Breaking that is going to upset a > > > > > > lot of people (me included) resulting in busted networks. It > > > > > > would be a sure way to make oneself unpopular. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I expect there to be 2 call paths of phy_attach_direct: > > > > > > > - At probe time. Both the MAC driver and the PHY driver are probing. > > > > > > > This is what has this patch addresses. There is no issue to return > > > > > > > -EPROBE_DEFER at that time, since drivers connect to the PHY before > > > > > > > they register their netdev. So if connecting defers, there is no > > > > > > > netdev to unregister, and user space knows nothing of this. > > > > > > > - At .ndo_open time. This is where it maybe gets interesting, but not to > > > > > > > user space. If you open a netdev and it connects to the PHY then, I > > > > > > > wouldn't expect the PHY to be undergoing a probing process, all of > > > > > > > that should have been settled by then, should it not? Where it might > > > > > > > get interesting is with NFS root, and I admit I haven't tested that. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think you can make that assumption. Consider the case where > > > > > > systemd is being used, DSA stuff is modular, and we're trying to > > > > > > setup a bridge device on DSA. DSA could be probing while the bridge > > > > > > is being setup. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sadly, this isn't theoretical. I've ended up needing: > > > > > > > > > > > > pre-up sleep 1 > > > > > > > > > > > > in my bridge configuration to allow time for DSA to finish probing. > > > > > > It's not a pleasant solution, nor a particularly reliable one at > > > > > > that, but it currently works around the problem. > > > > > > > > > > What problem? This is the first time I've heard of this report, and you > > > > > should definitely not need that. > > > > > > > > I found it when upgrading the Clearfog by the DSL modems to v5.13. > > > > When I rebooted it with a previously working kernel (v5.7) it has > > > > never had a problem. With v5.13, it failed to add all the lan ports > > > > into the bridge, because the bridge was still being setup by the > > > > kernel while userspace was trying to configure it. Note that I have > > > > extra debug in my kernels, hence the extra messages: > > > > > > Ok, first you talked about the interfaces file, then systemd. If it's > > > not about systemd's network manager then I don't see how it is relevant. > > > > You're reading in stuff to what I write that I did not write... I said: > > > > "Consider the case where systemd is being used, DSA stuff is modular, > > and we're trying to setup a bridge device on DSA." > > > > That does not mean I'm using systemd's network manager - which is > > something I know little about and have never used. > > You should definitely try it out, it gets a lot of new features added > all the time, it uses the netlink interface, it reacts on udev events. > > > The reason I mentioned systemd is precisely because with systemd, you > > get a hell of a lot happening parallel - and that's significiant in > > this case, because it's very clear that modules are being loaded in > > parallel with networking being brought up - and that is where the > > problems begin. In fact, modules themselves get loaded in paralllel > > with systemd. > > So that's what I don't understand. You're saying that the ifupdown > service runs in parallel with systemd-modules-load.service, and > networking is a kernel module? Doesn't that mean it behaves as expected, > then? /shrug/ > Have you tried adding an 'After=systemd-modules-load.service' dependency > to the ifupdown service? I don't think that DSA is that bad that it > registers its net devices outside of the process context in which the > insmod mv88e6xxx.ko is called. Quite the opposite, I think (but I > haven't actually taken a close look yet) that the component stuff > Saravana is proposing would do exactly that. So you "fix" one issue, you > introduce another. # systemctl list-dependencies networking.service networking.service ├─ifupdown-pre.service ├─system.slice └─network.target # systemctl list-dependencies ifupdown-pre.service ifupdown-pre.service ├─system.slice └─systemd-udevd.service Looking in the service files for a better idea: networking.service: Requires=ifupdown-pre.service Wants=network.target After=local-fs.target network-pre.target apparmor.service systemd-sysctl.service systemd-modules-load.service ifupdown-pre.service Before=network.target shutdown.target network-online.target ifupdown-pre.service: Wants=systemd-udevd.service After=systemd-udev-trigger.service Before=network.target So, the dependency you mention is already present. As is a dependency on udev. The problem is udev does all the automatic module loading asynchronously and in a multithreaded way. I don't think there's a way to make systemd wait for all module loads to complete. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
