netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>
To: zyjzyj2000@gmail.com
Cc: vfalico@gmail.com, gospo@cumulusnetworks.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Boris.Shteinbock@windriver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] bonding: restrict up state in 802.3ad mode
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:57:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1586.1450389436@famine> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450339417-31254-1-git-send-email-zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>

<zyjzyj2000@gmail.com> wrote:

>From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
>
>In 802.3ad mode, the speed and duplex is needed. But in some NIC,
>there is a time span between NIC up state and getting speed and duplex.
>As such, sometimes a slave in 802.3ad mode is in up state without
>speed and duplex. This will make bonding in 802.3ad mode can not
>work well. 
>To make bonding driver be compatible with more NICs, it is
>necessary to restrict the up state in 802.3ad mode.

	What device is this?  It seems a bit odd that an Ethernet device
can be carrier up but not have the duplex and speed available.

	Also, what are the option settings for bonding?  Specifically,
is "use_carrier" set to 0?  The default setting is 1.

	In general, though, bonding expects a speed or duplex change to
be announced via a NETDEV_UPDATE or NETDEV_UP notifier, which would
propagate to the 802.3ad logic.

	If the device here is going carrier up prior to having speed or
duplex available, then maybe it should call netdev_state_change() when
the duplex and speed are available, or delay calling netif_carrier_on().

>Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c |   19 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>index 9e0f8a7..0a80fb3 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>@@ -1991,6 +1991,25 @@ static int bond_miimon_inspect(struct bonding *bond)
> 
> 		link_state = bond_check_dev_link(bond, slave->dev, 0);
> 
>+		/* Since some NIC has time span between netif_running and
>+		 * getting speed and duples. That is, after a NIC is up (netif_running),
>+		 * there is a time span before this NIC is negotiated with speed and duplex.
>+		 * During this time span, the slave in 802.3ad is configured without speed
>+		 * and duplex. This 802.3ad bonding will not work because it needs slave's speed
>+		 * and duplex to generate key field.
>+		 * As such, we restrict up in 802.3ad mode to: netif_running && peed != SPEED_UNKNOWN &&
>+		 * duplex != DUPLEX_UNKNOWN
>+		 */
>+		if ((BMSR_LSTATUS == link_state) &&
>+		    (BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_8023AD)) {
>+			bond_update_speed_duplex(slave);
>+			if ((slave->speed == SPEED_UNKNOWN) ||
>+			    (slave->duplex == DUPLEX_UNKNOWN)) {
>+				link_state = 0;
>+				netdev_info(bond->dev, "In 802.3ad mode, it is not enough to up without speed and duplex");
>+			}
>+		}

	Also, as a functional note on this patch, the above looks like
it will spam the log repeatedly every miimon interval for as long as the
"carrier up but no speed/duplex" situation persists.

	-J

> 		switch (slave->link) {
> 		case BOND_LINK_UP:
> 			if (link_state)
>-- 
>1.7.9.5
>

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@canonical.com

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-17 21:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-17  8:03 [PATCH 1/1] bonding: restrict up state in 802.3ad mode zyjzyj2000
2015-12-17 21:57 ` Jay Vosburgh [this message]
2015-12-18  4:36   ` zyjzyj2000
2015-12-18  4:36     ` [PATCH 1/1] bonding: delay up state without speed and duplex " zyjzyj2000
2015-12-18  4:54       ` Jay Vosburgh
2015-12-18 13:37       ` Sergei Shtylyov
2015-12-28  8:43   ` [PATCH 1/1] bonding: restrict up state " Michal Kubecek
2015-12-28  9:19     ` zhuyj
2016-01-06  1:26       ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-06  3:05         ` zhuyj
2016-01-07  2:43           ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-07  3:33             ` zhuyj
2016-01-07  5:02               ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-07  6:15                 ` zyjzyj2000
2016-01-07  6:22                   ` zhuyj
2016-01-07  6:33                   ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-01-07 15:27                     ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-08  1:28                     ` [RFC PATCH net-next] bonding: Use notifiers for slave link state detection Jay Vosburgh
2016-01-08  4:36                       ` zhuyj
2016-01-08  6:12                         ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-01-08  7:41                           ` (unknown), zyjzyj2000
2016-01-08  7:41                             ` [PATCH 1/1] bonding: utilize notifier callbacks to detect slave link state changes zyjzyj2000
2016-01-08 10:18                               ` zhuyj
2016-01-09  1:35                       ` [RFC PATCH net-next] bonding: Use notifiers for slave link state detection Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-09  2:19                         ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-01-11  9:03                           ` zhuyj
2016-01-13  2:54                             ` zhuyj
2016-01-13 17:03                           ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-20  5:13                             ` [PATCH 1/1] " zyjzyj2000
2016-01-20  5:13                               ` zyjzyj2000
2016-01-21 10:16                             ` zyjzyj2000
2016-01-21 10:16                               ` zyjzyj2000
2016-01-25 16:37                                 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-26  0:43                                 ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-01-26  3:19                                   ` zhuyj
2016-01-26  6:00                                     ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-01-26  6:26                                       ` zhuyj
2016-01-26  6:45                                         ` zhuyj
2016-01-27 20:00                                       ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-28  8:44                                         ` zyjzyj2000
2016-01-29  7:05                                       ` zhuyj
2016-01-25 16:33                               ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-25 18:00                                 ` David Miller
2016-01-25 18:37                                   ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-08  2:29                     ` [PATCH 1/1] bonding: restrict up state in 802.3ad mode zhuyj
2016-01-07  6:53                   ` Michal Kubecek
2016-01-07  7:37                     ` zhuyj
2016-01-07  7:59                       ` Michal Kubecek
2016-01-07  8:35                         ` zhuyj
2016-01-07  7:47             ` zhuyj
2016-01-07 18:28               ` Tantilov, Emil S
2016-01-08  6:09                 ` zhuyj
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-01-07  6:13 zyjzyj2000

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1586.1450389436@famine \
    --to=jay.vosburgh@canonical.com \
    --cc=Boris.Shteinbock@windriver.com \
    --cc=gospo@cumulusnetworks.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vfalico@gmail.com \
    --cc=zyjzyj2000@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).