From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net/bonding: fix link status check
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 17:10:58 +0100
Message-ID: <804866d5-8b3a-7992-b15c-7e2f04d4245c@intel.com>
References: <20171129145349.43448-1-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
 <20171129154200.14436-1-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
 <581f7aef-7dc6-22dc-f177-049e9384c051@intel.com> <7290841.LMfcIyB1JH@xps>
 <CAG2-Gk=pHUSfmRRm6--TLam=zzzJEpvbjC6LUb61a8qgJfx-eQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 Tomasz Kulasek <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>,
 "Nicolau, Radu" <radu.nicolau@intel.com>
To: Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798281EFE6
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 18:11:02 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <CAG2-Gk=pHUSfmRRm6--TLam=zzzJEpvbjC6LUb61a8qgJfx-eQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 2/12/2018 6:26 PM, Chas Williams wrote:
> It's not clear to me that link_properties_valid() is even correct.  Nothing
> prevents an adapter from later negotiating a lower speed and would fail this
> test.  If both adapters are set to autoneg, that should be sufficient but
> nothing enforces the speed match after the slaves are configured.  So what is
> the point of this check?

Reminder of this patch.

This is waiting in the backlog for a long time. It is not even clear if the
patch is still valid or not.

Also based on missing response to Chas' clarification request, I am for
dropping/rejecting the patch.

@Declan, @Radu please chime in if this patch is required/valid.

> 
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net
> <mailto:thomas@monjalon.net>> wrote:
> 
>     17/01/2018 17:02, Ferruh Yigit:
>     > On 11/29/2017 3:42 PM, Tomasz Kulasek wrote:
>     > > Some devices needs more time to initialize and bring interface up. When
>     > > link is down the link properties are not valid, e.g. link_speed is
>     > > reported as 0 and this is not a valid speed for slave as well as for whole
>     > > bonding.
>     > >
>     > > During NIC (and bonding) initialization there's concurrency between
>     > > updating link status and adding slave to the bonding.
>     > >
>     > > This patch:
>     > >
>     > >  - adds delay before configuring bonding (if link is down) to be sure that
>     > >    link status of new slave is valid,
>     > >  - propagates information about link status from first slave with link up
>     > >    instead of first slave at all, to be sure that link speed is valid.
>     > >
>     > > Fixes: 6abd94d72ab5 ("net/bonding: fix check slaves link properties")
>     > > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Kulasek <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com <mailto:tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>>
>     > > ---
>     > > v2 changes:
>     > >  - Checkpatch warnings,
>     > >  - Improved code style
>     > Hi Declan,
>     >
>     > Any comment on this patch?
> 
>     Any news?
> 
> 
>