[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140228114056.GB11907@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:40:57 +0100
From: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
François CACHEREUL <f.cachereul@...halink.fr>,
Zhenjie Chen <zhchen@...hat.com>,
Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bonding: send arp requests even if there's no
route to them
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 03:38:19AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 12:28 +0100, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 03:12:51AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> >On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 11:57 +0100, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
>> ...snip...
>> >> + if (bond->params.arp_validate)
>> >> + pr_warn("%s: no route to arp_ip_target %pI4 and arp_validate is set\n",
>> >> + bond->dev->name, &targets[i]);
>> >
>> >Maybe
>> >
>> > if (bond->params.arp_validate && net_ratelimit())
>>
>> Hm, not that I'm against it - but bond_arp_send_all() is called every
>> arp_interval - which is usually >50ms. Does it really make sense to put it
>> here?
>
>Dunno, but you're converting a generally not emitted pr_debug
>(DEBUG isn't set, so it'd have to be enabled by dynamic_debug)
>to something that'll always print out a line for each of up to
>16 targets, so it seems it could be pretty noisy.
Yeah, completely agree (I've missed that there might be 16 targets).
Thanks a lot, will resend.
>
>
--
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