Re: [PATCH net 2/3] bonding: restructure ad_churn_machine

[Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 04:29:47PM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> >> Please avoid white-space changes only, or if you are going to target
> >> net-next, move them to a pre-req patch.
> > 
> > OK, what's pre-req patch?
> 
> I mean: a separate patch, earlier in the series, to keep cosmetic and
> functional changes separated and more easily reviewable.

Sure

> >>> +		if (actor_synced) {
> >>> +			port->sm_vars &= ~AD_PORT_ACTOR_CHURN;
> >>>  			port->sm_churn_actor_state = AD_NO_CHURN;
> >>> -		} else {
> >>> -			port->churn_actor_count++;
> >>> -			port->sm_churn_actor_state = AD_CHURN;
> >>> +			actor_churned = false;
> >>>  		}
> >>
> >> I think this part is not described by the state diagram above?!?
> > 
> > This part is about path (3), port in monitor or churn, and actor is in sync.
> > Then move to state no_churn.
> > 
> > Do you mean port->sm_vars &= ~AD_PORT_ACTOR_CHURN is not described?
> > Hmm, maybe we don't need this after re-organise.
> 
> I mean the state change in the else part, I can't map them in the state
> machine diagram.

The "else" line is removed

Thanks
Hangbin