[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9753.1613009185@famine>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:06:25 -0800
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
To: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, roopa@...dia.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
vfalico@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
alexander.duyck@...il.com, idosch@...dia.com,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/3] bonding: 3ad: support for 200G/400G ports and more verbose warning
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org> wrote:
>From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>
>
>Hi,
>We'd like to have proper 200G and 400G support with 3ad bond mode, so we
>need to add new definitions for them in order to have separate oper keys,
>aggregated bandwidth and proper operation (patches 01 and 02). In
>patch 03 Ido changes the code to use pr_err_once instead of
>pr_warn_once which would help future detection of unsupported speeds.
>
>v2: patch 03: use pr_err_once instead of WARN_ONCE
>
>Thanks,
> Nik
>
>Ido Schimmel (1):
> bonding: 3ad: Print an error for unknown speeds
>
>Nikolay Aleksandrov (2):
> bonding: 3ad: add support for 200G speed
> bonding: 3ad: add support for 400G speed
>
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Patches 1 and 2 could have been one patch, I suppose, but not
really a big deal. I'm in agreement about pr_err_once instead of
WARN_ONCE.
Acked-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists