bonding: Fix ARP monitor validation
commit 21a75f09 upstream. The current logic in bond_arp_rcv will accept an incoming ARP for validation if (a) the receiving slave is either "active" (which includes the currently active slave, or the current ARP slave) or, (b) there is a currently active slave, and it has received an ARP since it became active. For case (b), the receiving slave isn't the currently active slave, and is receiving the original broadcast ARP request, not an ARP reply from the target. This logic can fail if there is no currently active slave. In this situation, the ARP probe logic cycles through all slaves, assigning each in turn as the "current_arp_slave" for one arp_interval, then setting that one as "active," and sending an ARP probe from that slave. The current logic expects the ARP reply to arrive on the sending current_arp_slave, however, due to switch FDB updating delays, the reply may be directed to another slave. This can arise if the bonding slaves and switch are working, but the ARP target is not responding. When the ARP target recovers, a condition may result wherein the ARP target host replies faster than the switch can update its forwarding table, causing each ARP reply to be sent to the previous current_arp_slave. This will never pass the logic in bond_arp_rcv, as neither of the above conditions (a) or (b) are met. Some experimentation on a LAN shows ARP reply round trips in the 200 usec range, but my available switches never update their FDB in less than 4000 usec. This patch changes the logic in bond_arp_rcv to additionally accept an ARP reply for validation on any slave if there is a current ARP slave and it sent an ARP probe during the previous arp_interval. Fixes: aeea64ac ("bonding: don't trust arp requests unless active slave really works") Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com> Cc: Andy Gospodarek <gospo@cumulusnetworks.com> Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> [ luis: backported to 3.16: adjusted context ] Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment