From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shmulik Hen Subject: Re: [SET 2][PATCH 2/8][bonding] Propagating master's settings to slaves Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:15:18 +0300 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <200308120215.18234.shmulik.hen@intel.com> References: <200308112141.h7BLftpS015012@death.ibm.com> Reply-To: shmulik.hen@intel.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: hadi@cyberus.ca, Laurent DENIEL , bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Jay Vosburgh , Jeff Garzik In-Reply-To: <200308112141.h7BLftpS015012@death.ibm.com> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org May I remind you all that the original discussion was only about stuff that has to do with configuration time. There was no mention of any run time code. ifenslave only does three simple things - add a slave, remove a slave and set the current active slave, that's all. The drive was to try and make ifenslave slimmer regarding those three operations only in the way that any setting of the slave will be done by the kernel module instead of the configuration application. There is no real "brain" there anyway. We had some experience with creating an configuration application that was incredibly smart and was always aware of what was going on in the driver and could make all possible decisions before even attempting to access the driver so it could fail the operation without "bothering" the driver. It's gigantic. It's extremely hard to install and configure. It's even harder to maintain. And all it was meant to do is configuration. Imagine what would happen if it was also supposed to handle run time issues. I am not aware of anything like moving kernel code into applications. Was that something that was discussed in OLS ? Where can I find some more info about this trend ? Shmulik.