[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FD64A19.8000003@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:42:17 +0200
From: Nicolas de Pesloüan
<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>
To: Weiping Pan <wpan@...hat.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] bonding:check mode when modify primary_reselect
Le 11/06/2012 11:00, Weiping Pan a écrit :
> Using a primary_reselect only makes sense in active backup, TLB or ALB modes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Weiping Pan<wpan@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c
> index 485bedb..1b0f3cd 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c
> @@ -1123,6 +1123,13 @@ static ssize_t bonding_store_primary_reselect(struct device *d,
> if (!rtnl_trylock())
> return restart_syscall();
>
> + if (!USES_PRIMARY(bond->params.mode)) {
> + pr_err("%s: Unable to set primary_reselect; %s is in mode %d\n",
> + bond->dev->name, bond->dev->name, bond->params.mode);
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> new_value = bond_parse_parm(buf, pri_reselect_tbl);
> if (new_value< 0) {
> pr_err("%s: Ignoring invalid primary_reselect value %.*s.\n",
May I suggest we only issue a warning, store the new value for primary_reselect, and avoid calling
bond_select_active_slave(bond), if !USE_PRIMARY(bond->params.mode)?
That way, we do not add one more constraint on the order one must write into sysfs.
Nicolas.
--
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