[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1269297485.3552.26.camel@calx>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:38:05 -0500
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...hat.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
bonding-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 3/3] bonding: make bonding support netpoll
On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 04:17 -0400, Amerigo Wang wrote:
> Based on Andy's work, but I modify a lot.
>
> Similar to the patch for bridge, this patch does:
>
> 1) implement the 4 methods to support netpoll for bonding;
>
> 2) modify netpoll during forwarding packets in bonding;
>
> 3) disable netpoll support of bridge when a netpoll-unabled device
> is added to bonding;
>
> 4) enable netpoll support when all underlying devices support netpoll.
Again, not sure if this is the right policy. Seems to me that on a
bonding device we should simply pick an interface to send netpoll
messages on, without reference to balancing, etc. Thus, if any of the
bonded devices supports polling, it should work.
Hopefully someone more familiar with the goals and philosophy of the
bonding code can comment further.
--
http://selenic.com : development and support for Mercurial and Linux
--
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