[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DD4A6F9.4010002@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 13:13:29 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Ferenc Wagner <wferi@...f.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next-2.6] netpoll: disable netpoll when enslave a
device
于 2011年05月18日 18:56, Neil Horman 写道:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:00:35PM +0800, Amerigo Wang wrote:
...
>> - case NETDEV_GOING_DOWN:
>> case NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE:
>> + case NETDEV_ENSLAVE:
>> nt->enabled = 0;
>> stopped = true;
>> break;
> This wasn't introduced by this patch, but looking at it made me realize that
> nt->enabled, if it passes through this code path, doesn't properly track weather
> or not netpoll_setup has been called on this interface. If you look at
> drop_netconsole_target, you'll see we only call netpoll_cleanup_target if
> nt->enabled is set. We should probably change the nt->enabled check there, and
> in store_enabled to be if (nt->np.dev), like we do in the NETDEV_UNREGISTER case
> in netconsole_netdev_event.
Yeah, also note that we can change ->enabled via configfs too.
I guess we probably need to fix this in another patch...
>> +#define NETDEV_ENSLAVE 0x0014
>>
> Nit:
> Shouldn't this be NETDEV_BONDING_ENSLAVE, to keep it in line with
> NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE above?
Actually that is my first thought, but I plan to use this in bridge
case too, because using netconsole on a device underlying a bridge
makes little sense too. Thus, I prefer NETDEV_ENSLAVE to
NETDEV_BONDING_ENSLAVE.
>
>> #define SYS_DOWN 0x0001 /* Notify of system down */
>> #define SYS_RESTART SYS_DOWN
>>
>
>
> Other than those two points, this looks good to me
Thanks for review.
--
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