[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <97949e3e0902231201n4781d2c4q261bfc62ba1cb7fc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:01:38 -0800
From: Laurent Chavey <chavey@...gle.com>
To: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Subject: [PATCH 001/001] bonding: add support for netdev link events.
From: Laurent Chavey <chavey@...gle.com>
kernel:2.6.28
Add a netdev link event handler so the bond state machine can react to
link state changes using async netdev events rather than having to
use mii monitor polling.
Signed-off-by: Laurent Chavey <chavey@...gle.com>
---
--- linux-2.6.28.org/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c 2008-12-24
15:26:37.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.28/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c 2009-02-23
10:59:12.000000000 -0800
@@ -2477,7 +2477,11 @@ void bond_mii_monitor(struct work_struct
}
re_arm:
- if (bond->params.miimon)
+ /* A netdev event may have set some delay work, in that
+ * case do not remove it and let it take priority.
+ */
+ if (bond->params.miimon && !bond->kill_timers &&
+ !delayed_work_pending(&bond->mii_work))
queue_delayed_work(bond->wq, &bond->mii_work,
msecs_to_jiffies(bond->params.miimon));
out:
@@ -3521,6 +3525,33 @@ static int bond_master_netdev_event(unsi
return NOTIFY_DONE;
}
+static inline void bond_netdev_link_event(struct bonding *bond)
+{
+ if (!bond->params.use_carrier)
+ return;
+
+ write_lock_bh(&bond->lock);
+ if (bond->kill_timers) {
+ write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ if (delayed_work_pending(&bond->mii_work)) {
+ /* cancel_delayed_work(&bond->mii_work); calls del_timer_sync().
+ * We implement a version that does not call del_timer_sync().
+ * if an active timer is found, then the job is not on the WQ.
+ * we clear the PENDING bit, so the job can be added later
+ * else the job maybe done (PENDING bit is clear) or it maybe
+ * running, then we do not care and do only add a new job
+ * if the job has completed.
+ */
+ if (del_timer(&bond->mii_work.timer))
+ work_clear_pending(&bond->mii_work.work);
+ }
+ queue_delayed_work(bond->wq, &bond->mii_work, 0);
+ write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock);
+}
+
static int bond_slave_netdev_event(unsigned long event, struct
net_device *slave_dev)
{
struct net_device *bond_dev = slave_dev->master;
@@ -3536,15 +3567,17 @@ static int bond_slave_netdev_event(unsig
}
break;
case NETDEV_CHANGE:
- /*
- * TODO: is this what we get if somebody
- * sets up a hierarchical bond, then rmmod's
- * one of the slave bonding devices?
- */
- break;
+ case NETDEV_UP:
case NETDEV_DOWN:
+ if (bond_dev && bond_dev->priv &&
+ ARPHRD_ETHER == slave_dev->type) {
+ bond_netdev_link_event(bond_dev->priv);
+ }
+
/*
- * ... Or is it this?
+ * TODO: do we get a NETDEV_CHANGE or NETDEV_DOWN event
+ * if somebody sets up a hierarchical bond, then rmmod's
+ * one of the slave bonding devices?
*/
break;
case NETDEV_CHANGEMTU:
@@ -5196,4 +5229,3 @@ MODULE_SUPPORTED_DEVICE("most ethernet d
* tab-width: 8
* End:
*/
-
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists