On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 08:27:31AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:11:18 +0300 > Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 09:05:05AM +0000, Konstantin Taranov wrote: > > > > > When mc->ports[0] is not slave, use it in the set_netdev. > > > > > When mana is used in netvsc, the stored net devices in mana are slaves > > > > > and GIDs should be taken from their master devices. > > > > > In the baremetal case, the mc->ports devices will not be slaves. > > > > > > > > I wonder, why do you have "... | IFF_SLAVE" in __netvsc_vf_setup() in a first > > > > place? Isn't IFF_SLAVE is supposed to be set by bond driver? > > > > > > > > > > I guess it is just a valid use of the IFF_SLAVE bit. In the bond case it is also set > > > as a BOND netdev. The IFF_SLAVE helps to show users that another master > > > netdev should be used for networking. But I am not an expert in netvsc. > > > > The thing is that netvsc is virtual device like many others, but it is > > the only one who uses IFF_SLAVE bit. The comment around that bit says > > "slave of a load balancer.", which is not the case according to the > > Hyper-V documentation. > > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/network/overview-of-hyper-v > > > > You will need to get Ack from netdev maintainers to rely on IFF_SLAVE > > bit in the way you are relying on it now. > > This is used to tell userspace tools to not interact directly with the device. > For example, it is used when VF is connected to netvsc device. > It prevents things like IPv6 local address, and Network Manager won't modify device. You described how hyper-v uses it, but I'm interested to get acknowledgment that it is a valid use case for IFF_SLAVE, despite sentence written in the comment. Thanks
