From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D5CA0C43; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:52:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5056410FA; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:52:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC1C1410F4 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:52:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dggeme756-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4HYX6g3SJHzbn8w; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:47:39 +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 15.1.2308.15; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:52:12 +0800 From: "Min Hu (Connor)" To: "dev@dpdk.org" CC: Declan Doherty , Ferruh Yigit , Thomas Monjalon References: <4de1abc6-69ea-2fb8-19bf-1a2ab480cbd8@huawei.com> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 19:52:11 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4de1abc6-69ea-2fb8-19bf-1a2ab480cbd8@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.103.128] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To dggeme756-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.102) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi, anyone could give me a reply? thanks. 在 2021/10/14 10:13, Min Hu (Connor) 写道: > 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. > .