netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 3/3] bonding,ipv4,ipv6,vlan: Handle NETDEV_BONDING_FAILOVER like NETDEV_NOTIFY

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2011 21:13:49 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	fubar@...ibm.com
Cc:	bhutchings@...arflare.com, andy@...yhouse.net, kaber@...sh.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, brian.haley@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 3/3] bonding,ipv4,ipv6,vlan: Handle
 NETDEV_BONDING_FAILOVER like NETDEV_NOTIFY_PEERS

From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:12:01 -0700

> Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com> wrote:
> 
>>Why would we activate a slave without link up?  Perhaps if the previous
>>active slave is removed?
> 
> 	It's special sauce for Infiniband; I don't recall the details
> except that the submitter said that without it the initial gratuitous
> ARP could be lost.  I didn't (and still don't) have IB hardware to test
> this on.

I vaguely remember this IB has too, but also forget the details.

If someone would get to the bottom of this and add a nice big comment
to the code, to prevent such difficulties in remembering exactly why we
do this in the future, I would very much appreciate it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html