Jarod Wilson <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:55 PM Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosbu...@canonical.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> Jarod Wilson <ja...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Don't try to adjust XFRM support flags if the bond device isn't yet
>> >registered. Bad things can currently happen when netdev_change_features()
>> >is called without having wanted_features fully filled in yet. Basically,
>> >this code was racing against register_netdevice() filling in
>> >wanted_features, and when it got there first, the empty wanted_features
>> >led to features also getting emptied out, which was definitely not the
>> >intended behavior, so prevent that from happening.
>>
>> Is this an actual race? Reading Ivan's prior message, it sounds
>> like it's an ordering problem (in that bond_newlink calls
>> register_netdevice after bond_changelink).
>
>Sorry, yeah, this is not actually a race condition, just an ordering
>issue, bond_check_params() gets called at init time, which leads to
>bond_option_mode_set() being called, and does so prior to
>bond_create() running, which is where we actually call
>register_netdevice().
So this only happens if there's a "mode" module parameter? That
doesn't sound like the call path that Ivan described (coming in via
bond_newlink).
-J
>> The change to bond_option_mode_set tests against reg_state, so
>> presumably it wants to skip the first(?) time through, before the
>> register_netdevice call; is that right?
>
>Correct. Later on, when the bonding driver is already loaded, and
>parameter changes are made, bond_option_mode_set() gets called and if
>the mode changes to or from active-backup, we do need/want this code
>to run to update wanted and features flags properly.
>
>
>--
>Jarod Wilson
>ja...@redhat.com
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosbu...@canonical.com
