From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A50E3C43387 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 22:10:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F3392146F for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 22:10:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="F9WZxSyd" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730426AbfAHWKT (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2019 17:10:19 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com ([209.85.208.195]:42619 "EHLO mail-lj1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728041AbfAHWKT (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2019 17:10:19 -0500 Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id l15-v6so4750335lja.9; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 14:10:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6PCL6SPpxh6oJrJWKG6CXu3MXYNCgU8onwhqQd2u91k=; b=F9WZxSyd4KRouDh0sH0eLyvGsEIWlIk9AUuOwZvDdLXMwcov1QczghHVs3c/7/VmQd BD7/vW/Cb4RMsyUR9R1q9s7ghr4DDLse10IBxdq+umEE+yBsvvf+PBqmBSaXY9F8jBQu EXoebQjbcjQhFpPEddf4sv32kEsfgEX6WnLl532XYjgvMd9YrCii4EOywpPht3SkQVGx NxfcPmxTv/DTw13Kaw/8tqTXT7wEY4TKxwKJIW7BCTgEryo3HfwSumUoNjXBR3cjN9Hu vIQabCzF48Hz441ul7hv+6PthVILE3MhZNqjIMN5Z/p+9OHR6iEZOvJd5qIAvbAk/Ai1 iZUg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6PCL6SPpxh6oJrJWKG6CXu3MXYNCgU8onwhqQd2u91k=; b=dXgEQRvVavRMNfyROtPVTxUBHzqfOCOnnLwStvWziMBrsuRqHWd+5xXm8L5tLMludW BgZWaL+sYD+mPdVINDdbCingqyG70e5ybOWbbRoWq8HZHCKjdQUHzQm5c4/bgm5sOCq3 P7g7vtjeCMwQDQg1PJHN/zgVbPC/Y6YUUJxvBNyJOnLDksXWFpa/LAy5apwBqOGMsKDB 9rjzs/d23esd74ZuhT/J7BvxlCjR+yfle7Yjw7uFJXu3En0kQ6zrHFqa/CjNWS4TL76Z kJ+2Qa34VKLCYj1ny6nzBpMqVgnxd4+9WaA1FBN31zQS2YYYioFnyzHkIz5TxS3oWHM1 Gp8A== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukc4auVCTOxo2EAQeKLXqc7W7CI5gQG+RBTyUpor5MaFCN4xNkIu nUSTUArJhffm84Y75aBUI3wiZEvmxVzzaDUoEEHw7A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7rHdaz/xuJmrRYVPxp8Y/0Bwq4Nnll0v3UQEGdW94IbgfSZvN9DTjmQ3iDSpvfExe4gVMlDxTf4UJzXLAYxj8= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:5b93:: with SMTP id m19-v6mr1737897lje.115.1546985415412; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 14:10:15 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ian Kumlien Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 23:10:04 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BUG] v4.20 - bridge not getting DHCP responses? (works in 4.19.13) To: Linux Kernel Network Developers Cc: jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, Roopa Prabhu , nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 11:21 PM Ian Kumlien wrote: > > [Sorry for the repost, screwed up the netdev address...] > > Hi, > > Switching from 4.19.x -> 4.20 resulted in DHCP not working for my VM:s. > > My firewall (which also runs the dhcpd) runs VM:s and it does this by > having physical > interfaces attached to bridges - which the VM:s in turn attach to. > > Since 4.20 the VM:s can't use DHCP, it's odd since the requests are > seen - a response is sent but > it never enters the interface attached to the bridge. > > Basically: > VM vnet2: -> br0 -> eno2 -> switch -> eno1 (dhcpd) > dhcpd eno1 -> siwtch and... gone. > > Any clues? > > All the nics are handled by ixgbe So, doing similar tests at work with other drivers works - could it be related to the mac address filter that was added? I don't *really* use VF:s though... (can't really find anything else atm) Will try to test, but the VM:s on this machine is in use.