netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net-next] Bonding: add missed

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]

Date:   Thu, 18 Nov 2021 09:13:07 +0800
From:   Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To:     Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, davem@...emloft.net,
        Denis Kirjanov <dkirjanov@...e.de>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next] Bonding: add missed_max option

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 04:16:46PM +0000, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> >I didn't explain it clearly. I want to say:
> >
> >I'm not using arp_misssed_max as the new option name because I plan to add
> >bonding IPv6 NS/NA monitor in future. At that time the option "missed_max"
> >could be used for both IPv4/IPv6 monitor.
> >
> >I will update the commit description in next version.
> 
> 	There has been talk of adding an IPv6 NS monitor for years, but
> it hasn't manifested.  I would prefer to see a consistent set of options

I'm working on it now. I should send a simple draft patch in 2 weeks.

> nomenclature in what we have here and now.  If and when an IPv6 version
> is added, depending on the implementation, either the IPv6 item can be a
> discrete tunable, or an alias could be added, similar to num_grat_arp /
> num_unsol_na.

The name of num_grat_arp looks better than missed_max :) . In my
IPv6 implementation, the function bond_ab_arp_inspect() will be reused
directly. So one name or an alias looks more reasonable.

For the alias options, do you mean to let both num_grat_arp and num_unsol_na
change a same option in bond->params?

Thanks
Hangbin