From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@intel.com>
Cc: "Williams, Mitch A" <mitch.a.williams@intel.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
"Godse, Radheka" <radheka.godse@intel.com>,
netdev@oss.sgi.com, bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
fubar@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [PATCH 2.6.13-rc1 8/17] bonding: SYSFS INTERFACE (large)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 10:24:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050708172434.GI29606@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31F5998A44B92447BD334F8FBBA0B01F099F2656@orsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 05:32:03PM -0700, Brown, Aaron F wrote:
> >Why not just put them in /sys/class/bond/ instead?
>
> Bonding creates a virtual network device, it seems to logically fit down
> in /sys/class/net much better then at a level all to itself.
Ok, fair enough, it's up to you all where you want to put it, I was just
offering a suggestion.
> >> The problem, then, becomes one of separating the bond interfaces from
> the
> >> non-bond interfaces.
> >
> >See proposal above.
> >
> >> The bonding_masters file is a simple solution to
> >> this problem. Reading the file gives the set of active bonds, and
> >writing
> >> the file changes the set of active bonds. As I stated before, a
> cursory
> >> reading of Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.txt indicates that such a
> >usage
> >> is "socially acceptable". (Or at least it was to Patrick Mochel back
> in
> >> January of 2003.)
> >
> >Pat was just trying to be nice. I'm not. :)
> >
> >Also, if you have too many bonds, your code will fail.
>
> This is true, but an unlikely event in any real system I am aware of.
> If I use the max_bonds load parameter and create say 600 bonds (which
> will be named bond0, bond1... bond599) then cat out the bonding_masters
> file I only see 524 bonds (bond0...bond523.)
Yup, don't want to have that happen. So I'm glad you agree with me :)
> However, as a bond interface requires at least one but usually more
> physical network devices to be of much benefit I see it unlikely that
> anybody will really ever have a real need for that many bonds. Since
> bonding really is used for combining 2 or more adapters into a single
> logical channel it could handle 1048 ports set up in bonds of 2 before
> this type of failure would appear.
Can you guarantee that no one wants that many bonds? I can't, and I
don't think you want to redo your userinterface some time in the future
when people ask for this. My proposal has no such limitations.
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-08 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-08 0:32 [Bonding-devel] Re: [PATCH 2.6.13-rc1 8/17] bonding: SYSFS INTERFACE (large) Brown, Aaron F
2005-07-08 17:24 ` Greg KH [this message]
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=20050708172434.GI29606@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=aaron.f.brown@intel.com \
--cc=bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=fubar@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=mitch.a.williams@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=radheka.godse@intel.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