Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:07:56 +0100 From: Harry Schmalzbauer <freebsd@omnilan.de> To: Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unable to use renamed tap device Message-ID: <5A47B9DC.4070503@omnilan.de> In-Reply-To: <20171230061053.ui4wc4yqw7szsbuw@mutt-hbsd> References: <20171230061053.ui4wc4yqw7szsbuw@mutt-hbsd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bezüglich Shawn Webb's Nachricht vom 30.12.2017 07:10 (localtime): > Hey All, > > I'm in the process of reorganizing my bhyve setup on my development > laptop. I'd like to have rename the tap devices to match the name of > the VM so that it's easier to keep track of. Otherwise, I have to keep > a spreadsheet of (tap3 -> win10-vm, tap4 -> fbsd-vm). > > It appears bhyve doesn't attach renamed tap devices. Here's the steps > I used: > > ifconfig bridge0 create > ifconfig tap0 create name fbsd-01 > ifconfig bridge0 addm em0 addm fbsd-01 up > sh /usr/share/examples/bhyve/vmrun.sh -t fbsd-01 [normal vmrun.sh arguments here] > > (In this example, em0 is the physical network device connected to the > LAN. I want to share em0 with the host and the guest via the bridge.) > > The net.link.tap.up_on_open sysctl node is set to 1. Normally, when > bhyve starts up (with tap0 instead of fbsd-01), it opens the tap > device and UPs it. I'm not seeing that same behavior with a renamed > tap interface: > > $ ifconfig ld-03_01 > ld-03_01: flags=8903<UP,BROADCAST,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500 > options=80000<LINKSTATE> > ether 00:bd:df:e9:f6:04 > groups: tap > media: Ethernet autoselect > status: no carrier > nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL> > > So, it seems to me that bhyve doesn't like it when tap devices are > renamed. Can anyone shed some light on this? Unfortunately not too much, besides this report: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219746 As long as the control device name isn't also renamed, tap/vmnet renaming should be blocked in rc(8), since it can't work the way it is at the moment. Unfortunately my C skills don't allow me to check if renaming the control device could/should be implemented in whatever functions are responsible for IF renaming (meaning to make it a kernel task). Or if it would be better to utilize devd(8)!? -harry
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5A47B9DC.4070503>