Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next v2 1/3] bonding: update the primary slave when changing slave's name

[Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 05:08:21PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote:
>If the slave's name changed, and the bond params primary is exist,
>the bond should deal with the situation in two ways:
>
>1) If the slave was the primary slave yet, clean the primary slave
>   and reselect active slave.
>2) If the slave's new name is as same as bond primary, set the slave
>   as primary slave and reselect active slave.
>
>Thanks for Veaceslav's suggestion.
>
>Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>index e06c445..64e25d5 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>@@ -2860,9 +2860,29 @@ static int bond_slave_netdev_event(unsigned long event,
> 		 */
> 		break;
> 	case NETDEV_CHANGENAME:
>-		/*
>-		 * TODO: handle changing the primary's name
>+		/* Handle changing the slave's name:
>+		 * 1) If the slave was primary slave,
>+		 * clean the primary slave and reselect
>+		 * active slave.
>+		 * 2) If the slave's new name is same as
>+		 * bond primary, set the slave as primary
>+		 * slave and reselect active slave.
> 		 */
>+		if (slave == bond->primary_slave ||
>+		    !strcmp(bond->params.primary, slave_dev->name)) {

And if we're in a mode that doesn't use primary, but have the
params.primary set? Then we'll issue a bond_select_active_slave() in, say,
802.3ad mode.

In the past 24h I've nacked about 5 of your patchsets, with you keeping
'quickfixing' them, without getting your time to understand the issues, and
re-sending them for review.

I'm not willing to waste my time that uselessly, reviewing patchsets that
you randomly generate in the hope of getting it right. And given your
'good' history - with patchsets that cause regressions and bugs, with
reverts because of that, with those horrible, meaningless RCU transition
that is just plainly wrong and *really* hard to fix - I'm going to react as
Greg KH said in one of his presentations - NAK your patches and make them
by myself. It will take *a lot* lesser time from my side, and will
eventually make the code better.

Thanks for the report, I'll send a patch that fixes it soon.

Nacked-by: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>

>+			if (bond->primary_slave) {
>+				pr_info("%s: Setting primary slave to None.\n",
>+					bond->dev->name);
>+				bond->primary_slave = NULL;
>+			} else {
>+				pr_info("%s: Setting %s as primary slave.\n",
>+					bond->dev->name, slave_dev->name);
>+				bond->primary_slave = slave;
>+			}
>+			write_lock_bh(&bond->curr_slave_lock);
>+			bond_select_active_slave(bond);
>+			write_unlock_bh(&bond->curr_slave_lock);
>+		}
> 		break;
> 	case NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE:
> 		bond_compute_features(bond);
>-- 
>1.8.0
>
>