From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE51A0C4B;
	Thu, 14 Oct 2021 04:13:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B18140042;
	Thu, 14 Oct 2021 04:13:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.189])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 719DA40041
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 04:13:40 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from dggeme756-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.55])
 by szxga03-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4HVCbL5995z8tWb
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:12:30 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.67.103.128] (10.67.103.128) by
 dggeme756-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server
 (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id
 15.1.2308.8; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:13:38 +0800
To: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
CC: Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>
From: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <4de1abc6-69ea-2fb8-19bf-1a2ab480cbd8@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:13:37 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.67.103.128]
X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.183) To
 dggeme756-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.102)
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: [dpdk-dev] Question about bonding port promiscuous
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi, Declan Doherty,
	In function "bond_ethdev_promiscuous_disable",
for "ROUND ROBIN","BALANCE","BROADCAST","8023AD" mode, Promiscuous mode
is propagated to all slaves.

While for "ACTIVE_BACKUP", "TLB", "ALB", promiscuous mode is propagated 
only to primary slave.

Why?

The second question, for "ACTIVE_BACKUP", when primary active slave
fails, a different slave becomes active, does the promiscuous mode state
of former primary should be set to the new primary?

	Hope for your reply.
	Best Wishes.