From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dawid Ciezarkiewicz Subject: Re: [RFC] wrr (weighted round-robin) bonding Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 21:41:14 +0200 Message-ID: <200610202141.15140.dpc@asn.pl> References: <200610162021.12884.dpc@asn.pl> <200610171016.21964.dpc@asn.pl> <20061019190407.GA23446@gospo.rdu.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from apollo.asn.pl ([85.14.104.1]:21124 "HELO apollo.asn.pl") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1422748AbWJTTl0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:41:26 -0400 To: Andy Gospodarek In-Reply-To: <20061019190407.GA23446@gospo.rdu.redhat.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thursday, 19 October 2006 21:04, Andy Gospodarek wrote: > It would seem to me that extending an existing mode would be more > desirable than adding yet another mode to worry about. I don't even > like the fact that there are as many as there are, but I understand why > they are there. Ack. I will probably update wrr bonding patch to replace rr mode. > I recently extended rr mode to allow an additional parameter called that > rr_repeat that would allow someone to send more than a single frame out > of each device before moving to the next one. It seemed this could be > helpful when dealing with switches that constantly re-learned source MAC > addresses. Network performance would suffer whenever rr_repeat was >1, > but box performance might be better if there weren't so many locks > taken. Thanks. I'll consider adding such functionality.