[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9BBC4E0CF881AA4299206E2E1412B6264FA0097E@ORSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:39:05 +0000
From: "Wyborny, Carolyn" <carolyn.wyborny@...el.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>,
"sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [net 1/8] igb: Update queue reinit function to call dev_close
when init of queues fails
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Hutchings [mailto:bhutchings@...arflare.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 9:18 AM
> To: Wyborny, Carolyn
> Cc: David Miller; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> gospo@...hat.com; sassmann@...hat.com
> Subject: Re: [net 1/8] igb: Update queue reinit function to call dev_close when
> init of queues fails
>
[..]
> My concerns were that after a failure where the interface is effectively down,
> - the interface must be in a consistent state where is it safe to reconfigure the
> interface again or to unbind the driver, and
> - it should be obviously down so the user can then try to bring it up again.
>
> David is saying that you should implement the reconfiguration in such a way that
> you can always roll back to the previous working state in case of a failure (which
> would make my concerns moot). This is definitely a good goal but I'm not
> convinced that it's always possible.
>
Thanks for the clarification Ben, I'll see what I can do to follow Dave's feedback.
Carolyn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists