On Tue, 2016-05-17 at 15:03 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > I've got a bug report about an e1000e interface, where a vlan interface > is > set up on top of it: > > $ ip link add link ens1f0 name ens1f0.99 type vlan id 99 > $ ip link set ens1f0 up > $ ip link set ens1f0.99 up > $ ip addr add 192.168.99.92 dev ens1f0.99 > > At this point, I can ping another host on vlan 99, ip 192.168.99.91. > However, if I do the following: > > $ ethtool -K ens1f0 rxvlan off > > Then no traffic passes on ens1f0.99. It comes back if I toggle rxvlan on > again. I'm not sure if this is actually intended behavior, or if there's > a > lack of software vlan stripping fallback, or what, but things continue to > work if I simply don't call e1000e_vlan_strip_disable() if there are > active vlans (plagiarizing a function from the e1000 driver here) on the > interface. > > Also slipped a related-ish fix to the kerneldoc text for > e1000e_vlan_strip_disable here... > > CC: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirs...@intel.com> > CC: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org > CC: net...@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <ja...@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 15 +++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Raanan, please review this patch. Even though it is an RFC I will be adding it to my queue for testing. http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/623238/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
