From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
To: Jesper Krogh <jesper@krogh.cc>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>,
aowi@novozymes.com
Subject: Re: Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 - bisected
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 08:28:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16084.1235752119@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49A7B17F.2020408@krogh.cc>
Jesper Krogh <jesper@krogh.cc> wrote:
[...]
>The offending commit seems to be:
>
>bonding: refactor mii monitor
>
>Refactor mii monitor. As with the previous ARP monitor refactor,
>the motivation for this is to handle locking rationally (in this case,
>removing conditional locking) and generally clean up the code.
>
>This patch breaks up the monolithic mii monitor into two phases:
>an inspection phase, followed by an optional commit phase. The commit phase
>is the only portion that requires RTNL or makes changes to state, and is
>only called when inspection finds something to change.
>
>Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
>Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
>
>
>A test with a fresh 2.6.29-rc6 revealed that the problem has been fixed
>subsequently.. but still exists in 2.6.27-newest. (havent tested
>2.6.28-newest yet).
>
>Any ideas of what the "fixing" commit is .. or should that also be
>bisected?
I went back and looked at your earlier mail. Since you're using
802.3ad mode, my first guess would be this commit:
commit fd989c83325cb34795bc4d4aa6b13c06f90eac99
Author: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue Nov 4 17:51:16 2008 -0800
bonding: alternate agg selection policies for 802.3ad
This patch implements alternative aggregator selection policies
for 802.3ad. The existing policy, now termed "stable," selects the active
aggregator by greatest bandwidth, and only reselects a new aggregator
if the active aggregator is entirely disabled (no more ports or all ports
down).
This patch adds two new policies: bandwidth and count, selecting
the active aggregator by total bandwidth (like the stable policy) or by
the number of ports in the aggregator, respectively. These two policies
also differ from the stable policy in that they will reselect the active
aggregator when availability-related changes occur in the bond (e.g.,
link state change).
This permits "gang failover" within 802.3ad, allowing redundant
aggregators along parallel paths to always maintain the "best" aggregator
as the active aggregator (rather than having to wait for the active to
entirely fail).
This patch also updates the driver version to 3.5.0.
Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@redhat.com>
This changed or refactored a great deal of the aggregator
selection logic, and it might be that it also fixed your problem by mere
happenstance.
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-27 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-16 9:41 Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 Jesper Krogh
2008-11-17 23:45 ` Jay Vosburgh
2008-11-18 20:24 ` Jesper Krogh
2008-11-18 20:28 ` Jesper Krogh
2008-11-18 20:53 ` Jay Vosburgh
2008-11-19 7:53 ` Jesper Krogh
2008-12-08 20:42 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
2008-11-19 10:01 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-02-27 9:25 ` Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 - bisected Jesper Krogh
2009-02-27 16:28 ` Jay Vosburgh [this message]
2009-02-27 20:07 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-02-27 20:35 ` Jay Vosburgh
2009-02-28 17:21 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-03-01 6:21 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-03-01 13:19 ` Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 - bisected - twice Jesper Krogh
2009-03-05 18:51 ` Jay Vosburgh
2009-03-09 20:53 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-03-13 23:12 ` David Miller
2009-03-13 23:27 ` Jay Vosburgh
2009-03-16 20:34 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-03-16 20:35 ` David Miller
2009-03-17 20:18 ` Jesper Krogh
2009-03-19 1:39 ` David Miller
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=16084.1235752119@death.nxdomain.ibm.com \
--to=fubar@us.ibm.com \
--cc=aowi@novozymes.com \
--cc=jesper@krogh.cc \
--cc=jgarzik@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).