[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140326132017.GE2869@minipsycho.orion>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 14:20:17 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, andy@...yhouse.net,
dborkman@...hat.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com, jesse@...ira.com,
pshelar@...ira.com, azhou@...ira.com,
Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, vyasevic <vyasevic@...hat.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/4] introduce infrastructure for support of
switch chip datapath
Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:06:08PM CET, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>On 03/26/14 07:00, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>>On 03/26/14 03:21, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Creating bonding of the switch ports does not fit into the picture at
>>>all.
>
>Sorry wanted to respond to the bonding part but my fingers kept typing;->
>
>If it cant do bonding and the chip is capable of LAGging, it is simply
>the wrong approach. I dont think what has been described so far will
>have a problem doing bonding.
I think that bonding (bonding driver or any of bonding driver interface)
should have nothing to do with the switch chip capability of link aggregation.
>
>
>
>cheers,
>jamal
--
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