[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87si1ax7t9.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 14:05:54 +0100
From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
To: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, kys@...rosoft.com,
olaf@...fle.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
driverdev-devel@...uxdriverproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] hv_netvsc: Increase delay for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com> writes:
> We simulates a link down period for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE message to
> trigger DHCP renew. User daemons may need multiple seconds to trigger the
> link down event. (e.g. ifplugd: 5sec, network-manager: 4sec.) So update
> this link down period to 10 sec to properly trigger DHCP renew.
>
I probably don't follow: why do we need sucha a delay? If (with real
hardware) you plug network cable out and in one second you plug it in
you'll get DHCP renewed, right?
When I introduced RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE handling by emulating a
pair of up/down events I put 2 second delay to make link_watch happy (as
we only handle 1 event per second there) but 10 seconds sounds to much
to me.
> Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c b/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c
> index 1d3a665..6f23973 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/hyperv/netvsc_drv.c
> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@
>
> #define RING_SIZE_MIN 64
> #define LINKCHANGE_INT (2 * HZ)
> +/* Extra delay for RNDIS_STATUS_NETWORK_CHANGE: */
> +#define LINKCHANGE_DELAY (8 * HZ)
> static int ring_size = 128;
> module_param(ring_size, int, S_IRUGO);
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(ring_size, "Ring buffer size (# of pages)");
> @@ -964,6 +966,7 @@ static void netvsc_link_change(struct work_struct *w)
> return;
> }
> ndev_ctx->last_reconfig = jiffies;
> + delay = LINKCHANGE_INT;
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&ndev_ctx->lock, flags);
> if (!list_empty(&ndev_ctx->reconfig_events)) {
> @@ -1009,8 +1012,11 @@ static void netvsc_link_change(struct work_struct *w)
> netif_tx_stop_all_queues(net);
> event->event = RNDIS_STATUS_MEDIA_CONNECT;
> spin_lock_irqsave(&ndev_ctx->lock, flags);
> - list_add_tail(&event->list, &ndev_ctx->reconfig_events);
> + list_add(&event->list, &ndev_ctx->reconfig_events);
Why? Adding to tail was here to not screw the order of events...
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ndev_ctx->lock, flags);
> +
> + ndev_ctx->last_reconfig += LINKCHANGE_DELAY;
> + delay = LINKCHANGE_INT + LINKCHANGE_DELAY;
> reschedule = true;
> }
> break;
> @@ -1025,7 +1031,7 @@ static void netvsc_link_change(struct work_struct *w)
> * second, handle next reconfig event in 2 seconds.
> */
> if (reschedule)
> - schedule_delayed_work(&ndev_ctx->dwork, LINKCHANGE_INT);
> + schedule_delayed_work(&ndev_ctx->dwork, delay);
> }
>
> static void netvsc_free_netdev(struct net_device *netdev)
--
Vitaly
Powered by blists - more mailing lists