netdev - Re: [E1000-devel] discussion questions: SR-IOV, virtualization, and bonding

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

Date:	Thu, 02 Aug 2012 16:33:27 -0600
From:	Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
CC:	"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] discussion questions: SR-IOV, virtualization, and
 bonding

On 08/02/2012 04:26 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 08/02/2012 02:30 PM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:

>> The best long term solution is to have a user space API that
>> provides link state input to bonding on a per-slave basis, and then some
>> user space entity can perform whatever link monitoring method is
>> appropriate (e.g., LLDP) and pass the results to bonding.
>
> I think this has potential. This requires a virtual communication
> channel between guest/host if we want the host to be able to influence
> the guest's choice of active link, but I think that's not unreasonable.
>
> Actually, couldn't we do this now? Turn off miimon and arpmon, then just
> have the userspace thing write to /sys/class/net/bondX/bonding/active_slave

Hmm...looks like the bonding code requires either miimon or arpmon.  I 
wonder if setting miimon to INT_MAX might work, at least for some 
bonding modes.

Chris
--
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