netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/4] bonding: allow carrier and link status to determine link state

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20180516.122847.2004339616613745427.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Wed, 16 May 2018 12:28:47 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
Cc:     dbanerje@...mai.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, vfalico@...il.com,
        andy@...yhouse.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/4] bonding: allow carrier and link status
 to determine link state

From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 18:11:08 +0200

> Debabrata Banerjee <dbanerje@...mai.com> wrote:
> 
>>In a mixed environment it may be difficult to tell if your hardware
>>support carrier, if it does not it can always report true. With a new
>>use_carrier option of 2, we can check both carrier and link status
>>sequentially, instead of one or the other
> 
> 	Your reply in the prior discussion suggests to me that there is
> a bug somewhere else (perhaps in bonding, perhaps in the network
> driver), and this is just papering over it.  As I said, I don't believe
> that an additional hack to bonding is the appropriate way to resolve
> this.

Sorry this crossed with my review and application of this series, my bad.

Debabrata please give a specific example of a case where the new "both"
mode actually is needed.

Thank you.