netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] bonding: add bond_set_slave

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:50:29 +0800
From:	Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
CC:	<vfalico@...hat.com>, <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	<cwang@...pensource.com>, <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	<thomas@...nzmann.de>, <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	<sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] bonding: add bond_set_slave_state/flags()

On 2014/2/18 10:08, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com> wrote:
> 
>> The new function could change the slave state and flags, then call
>> rtmsg_ifinfo() according to the input parameters notify.
>>
>> Cc: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
>> Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
>> Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h b/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h
>> index 86ccfb9..d210124 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h
>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h
>> @@ -303,6 +303,18 @@ static inline void bond_set_backup_slave(struct slave *slave)
>> 	}
>> }
>>
>> +static inline void bond_set_slave_state(struct slave *slave,
>> +					int slave_state, bool notify)
>> +{
>> +	if (slave->backup != slave_state)
>> +		slave->backup = slave_state;
>> +	else
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	if (notify)
>> +		rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, slave->dev, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> 	I think this would be clearer if coded as:
> 
> 	if (slave->backup == slave_slave)
> 		return;
> 
> 	slave->backup = slave_state;
> 	if (notify)
> 		rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, slave->dev, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
> 
Yes, more simple.

>> +}
>> +
>> static inline void bond_slave_state_change(struct bonding *bond)
>> {
>> 	struct list_head *iter;
>> @@ -408,6 +420,20 @@ static inline void bond_set_slave_active_flags(struct slave *slave)
>> 	slave->inactive = 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static inline void bond_set_slave_flags(struct slave *slave,
>> +					int state, bool notify)
>> +
>> +{
>> +	if (state == BOND_STATE_ACTIVE) {
>> +		bond_set_slave_state(slave, state, notify);
>> +		slave->inactive = 0;
>> +	} else if (state == BOND_STATE_BACKUP && !bond_is_lb(slave->bond)) {
>> +		bond_set_slave_state(slave, state, notify);
>> +		if (!slave->bond->params.all_slaves_active)
>> +			slave->inactive = 1;
>> +	}
>> +}
> 
> 	As I said in my other reply, I don't see why this shouldn't be
> integrated into the existing state change functions instead of creating
> a new function.
> 
> 	-J

Ok, thanks.

Ding

> 
>> static inline bool bond_is_slave_inactive(struct slave *slave)
>> {
>> 	return slave->inactive;
>> -- 
>> 1.8.0
> 
> ---
> 	-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@...ibm.com
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> .
> 


--
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