[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YaWo863zUUEj8nlU@Laptop-X1>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:30:43 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net-next] Bonding: add arp_missed_max option
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 10:50:01AM -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> >+arp_missed_max
> >+
> >+ Maximum number of arp_interval monitor cycle for missed ARP replies.
> >+ If this number is exceeded, link is reported as down.
> >+
> >+ Normally 2 monitor cycles are needed. One cycle for missed ARP request
> >+ and one cycle for waiting ARP reply.
> >+
> >+ The valid range is 1 - 255; the default value is 2.
> >+
>
> [ Apologies for the delay in responding, I was out for the US
> holiday last week. ]
>
> For the documentation here, since deleted code commentary from
> many years ago came up in discussion (re: backup interfaces get one more
> cycle), I'd suggest we rewrite the above as:
>
> arp_missed_max
>
> Specifies the number of arp_interval monitor checks that must
> fail in order for an interface to be marked down by the ARP
> monitor.
>
> In order to provide orderly failover semantics, backup
> interfaces are permitted an extra monitor check (i.e., they must
> fail arp_missed_max + 1 times before being marked down).
>
> The default value is 2, and the allowable range is 1 - 255.
>
>
> With the above caveat,
>
> Acked-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Thanks Jay for the review. Patch v4 posted.
Hangbin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists