[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52B5350E.7060203@huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 14:28:30 +0800
From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
To: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>
CC: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] bonding: add option lp_interval for loading
module
On 2013/12/21 10:06, Scott Feldman wrote:
>
> On Dec 19, 2013, at 9:10 PM, Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com> wrote:
>
>> @@ -4271,6 +4276,12 @@ static int bond_check_params(struct bond_params *params)
>> fail_over_mac_value = BOND_FOM_NONE;
>> }
>>
>> + if (lp_interval == 0) {
>> + pr_warning("Warning: ip_interval must be between 1 and %d, so it was reset to %d\n",
>> + INT_MAX, BOND_ALB_DEFAULT_LP_INTERVAL);
>> + lp_interval = BOND_ALB_DEFAULT_LP_INTERVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>
> [sorry, replied with wrong email]
>
> What do you think about using the new bond_option_xxx_set() functions for module parameters also? The above code, for example, is duplicated in bond_option_lp_interval_set(). This way, we have a unified solution, where option bounds checking, compatibility, warnings, etc happened in one place for all three modes of input: sysfs, netlink, and module params.
>
> -scott
>
Yes, I agree with you, and I will wait for you to finish the bond_option_xxx_set() and then make the bond_check_params() use them, I think the code will be more simplify.
Thanks
Regards
ding
> --
> 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
>
>
--
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