From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Gospodarek Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] bonding: 3 fixes for 2.6.24 Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:27:40 -0500 Message-ID: <20080109152740.GE8728@gospo.usersys.redhat.com> References: <11997574203125-git-send-email-fubar@us.ibm.com> <29560.1199820632@death> <17850.1199865514@death> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Krzysztof Oledzki , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik , David Miller , Andy Gospodarek , Herbert Xu To: Jay Vosburgh Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:48044 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752092AbYAIP3e (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:29:34 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17850.1199865514@death> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 11:58:34PM -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote: > Krzysztof Oledzki wrote: > > >Fine. Just let you know that someone test your patches and everything > >works, except mentioned problem. > > And I appreciate it; I just wanted to make sure our many fans > following along at home didn't misunderstand. > > Could you let me know if the patch below make the lockdep > warning go away? This applies on top of the previous three, although it > should be trivial to do by hand. > > I'm still checking to make sure this is safe with regard to > mutexing the bonding structures, but it would be good to know if it > eliminates the warning. > > -J > Jay, My initial concern was that a slave device could disappear out from under us, but it seems like this certainly isn't the case since all calls to bond_release are protected by rtnl-locks, so I think you are correct that we are safe. I'll test this on my setup here and let you know if I see any problems. -andy