[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090820.022058.160961745.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 02:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc: pgynther@...gle.com, shemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ibm_newemac: emac_close() needs to call
netif_carrier_off()
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:02:22 +1000
> On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 15:32 -0700, Petri Gynther wrote:
>> Stephen,
>>
>> I think your suggestion of adding netif_running() check to
>> bond_check_dev_link() is valid and a good fix to the bonding driver.
>> We can do this in a separate patch.
>>
>> However, I think that the change to ibm_newemac: emac_close() is
>> needed as well. ibm_newemac netdevs should not return
>> netif_carrier_ok() == TRUE when they have been shut down.
>
> Well, we definitely don't do that in sungem either, since we continue
> the link polling while the interface is down... IE. interface up/down is
> the data path and is orthogonal to the PHY polling in sungem. I suppose
> we -could- stop the polling while the interface is down, though I think
> my initial implementation did only poll the link while the interface was
> up and that was causing endless problems with various laptop-net style
> tools (however that was years and years ago).
It just shows how few people use sungem with bonding :-)
Short term I'm going to add the ibm_newemac change.
Longer term we should probably add the netif_running() check to
bond_check_dev_link().
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists