[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130621102318.GA7269@unicorn.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 12:23:18 +0200
From: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, fubar@...ibm.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
davem@...emloft.net, linux@...2.net, nicolas.2p.debian@...e.fr,
rick.jones2@...com, nikolay@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 6/6] bonding: add an option to fail when any
of arp_ip_target is inaccessible
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:35:05PM +0200, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> @@ -1712,6 +1721,8 @@ int bond_enslave(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev)
>
> new_slave->last_arp_rx = jiffies -
> (msecs_to_jiffies(bond->params.arp_interval) + 1);
> + for (i = 0; i < BOND_MAX_ARP_TARGETS; i++)
> + new_slave->target_last_arp_rx[i] = jiffies;
>
> if (bond->params.miimon && !bond->params.use_carrier) {
> link_reporting = bond_check_dev_link(bond, slave_dev, 1);
For cards with slow initial negotiation, this can cause a down -> up ->
down -> up flap on enslaving. This is why initial walue of last_arp_rx
was modified in commit f31c7937. Is there a reason not to initialize
target_last_arp_rx[i] to the same value?
Michal Kubecek
--
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