|
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 09:57:35PM +1000, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 01:42:59PM +0200, Julius Volz wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:41:22PM +1000, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 12:03:04PM +0200, Julius Volz wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 4:04 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > The impetus for this series of patches is Julian Anastasov noting
> > > > > that "load balance IPv4 connections from a local process" checks
> > > > > for 0 TCP checksums. Herbert Xu confirmed that this is not legal,
> > > > > even on loopback traffic, but that rather partial checksums are
> > > > > possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > The first patch in this series is a proposed solution to handle
> > > > > partial checksums for both TCP and UDP.
> > > > >
> > > > > The other two patches clean things up a bit.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have not tested this code beyond compilation yet.
> > > >
> > > > After some first tests, remote connections are still working, but not
> > > > local ones from the director. The TCP handshake works and the
> > > > connection is established, but all following packets arriving at the
> > > > real server have an incorrect TCP checksum.
> > > >
> > > > Btw., this happens both with and without this last series of patches,
> > > > so I can't get the local client feature working at all. Looking at it
> > > > further...
> > >
> > > Ok, is this for both IPv4 & IPv6? Does it still occur with just the first
> > > patch in this series applied?
> >
> > It's for both, although I only tested IPv4 at first. Here is a complete
> > test matrix of what works when:
> >
> > CR = connection refused
> > T = connection timeout
> > C = connection established, but not working afterwards
> > OK = working
> >
> > remote client | local client
> > COMMIT v4 v6 | v4 v6
> > ======================================|=================
> > CSUM 3/3 OK T | C T
> > CSUM 2/3 OK T | C T
> > CSUM 1/3 OK T | OK T
> > W/O CSUM OK T | C T
> > ... |
> > f2428ed5 OK T | CR CR
> > 4856c84c OK CR | CR CR
> > f94fd041 (my last one) OK OK | CR CR
> >
> > So the last time that IPv6 was working _at all_ was at my last commit of
> > the big v6 series...
>
> Ok, I'm really sorry about that :-(
>
> Do you want me to revert f2428ed5 & 4856c84c until this has been tracked down?
>
Hi,
Does 4856c84c + the following change (which you pointed out over the
weekend) work for remote IPv6 ?
diff --git a/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c b/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
index 26e3d99..c413444 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
@@ -1282,7 +1282,7 @@ ip_vs_in(unsigned int hooknum, struct sk_buff *skb,
* Don't handle local packets on IPv6 for now
*/
if (unlikely(skb->pkt_type != PACKET_HOST ||
- (af == AF_INET6 || (skb->dev->flags & IFF_LOOPBACK ||
+ (af == AF_INET6 && (skb->dev->flags & IFF_LOOPBACK ||
skb->sk)))) {
IP_VS_DBG_BUF(12, "packet type=%d proto=%d daddr=%s ignored\n",
skb->pkt_type,
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
