On 07/05/2020 21:45, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 1:31 PM Nikolay Aleksandrov
> wrote:
>> The patch looks good, but note that __netdev_update_features() used to
>> return -1
>> before the commit in the Fixes tag above (between 6cb6a27c45ce and
>> 00ee59271777).
>> It only restored t
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 1:31 PM Nikolay Aleksandrov
wrote:
> The patch looks good, but note that __netdev_update_features() used to return
> -1
> before the commit in the Fixes tag above (between 6cb6a27c45ce and
> 00ee59271777).
> It only restored that behaviour.
Good point! But commit fd867d51
Cong Wang wrote:
>syzbot managed to trigger a recursive NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE event
>between bonding master and slave. I managed to find a reproducer
>for this:
>
> ip li set bond0 up
> ifenslave bond0 eth0
> brctl addbr br0
> ethtool -K eth0 lro off
> brctl addif br0 bond0
> ip li set br0 up
On 06/05/2020 22:46, Cong Wang wrote:
> syzbot managed to trigger a recursive NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE event
> between bonding master and slave. I managed to find a reproducer
> for this:
>
> ip li set bond0 up
> ifenslave bond0 eth0
> brctl addbr br0
> ethtool -K eth0 lro off
> brctl addif br
syzbot managed to trigger a recursive NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE event
between bonding master and slave. I managed to find a reproducer
for this:
ip li set bond0 up
ifenslave bond0 eth0
brctl addbr br0
ethtool -K eth0 lro off
brctl addif br0 bond0
ip li set br0 up
When a NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE ev
