Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] bonding: handle slave's name change with primary_slave logic

[Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:32:59AM -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>Currently, if a slave's name change, we just pass it by. However, if the
>>slave is a current primary_slave, then we end up with using a slave, whose
>>name != params.primary, for primary_slave. And vice-versa, if we don't have
>>a primary_slave but have params.primary set - we will not detected a new
>>primary_slave.
>>
>>Fix this by catching the NETDEV_CHANGENAME event and setting primary_slave
>>accordingly. Also, if the primary_slave was changed, issue a reselection of
>>the active slave, cause the priorities have changed.
>>
>>Reported-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>>CC: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>>CC: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>
>>CC: Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>
>>Signed-off-by: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>
>>---
>> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>index e06c445..8077199 100644
>>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>@@ -2860,9 +2860,26 @@ static int bond_slave_netdev_event(unsigned long event,
>> 		 */
>> 		break;
>> 	case NETDEV_CHANGENAME:
>>-		/*
>>-		 * TODO: handle changing the primary's name
>>-		 */
>>+		/* we don't care if we don't have primary set */
>>+		if (!USES_PRIMARY(bond->params.mode) ||
>>+		    !bond->params.primary[0])
>>+			break;
>>+
>>+		if (slave == bond->primary_slave) {
>>+			/* slave's name changed - he's no longer primary */
>>+			bond->primary_slave = NULL;
>>+		} else if (!strcmp(slave_dev->name, bond->params.primary)) {
>>+			/* we have a new primary slave */
>>+			bond->primary_slave = slave;
>>+		} else  /* we didn't change primary - exit */
>>+			break;
>>+
>>+		pr_info("%s: Primary slave changed to %s, re-electing.\n",
>
>	I suspect you mean "reselecting" here, not "re-electing."  I'd
>add a couple more words, e.g., "reselecting active slave" to make it
>clearer.

Yep, sure, will reword and send v3.

Thank you!

>
>	-J
>
>>+			bond->dev->name, bond->primary_slave ? slave_dev->name :
>>+							       "none");
>>+		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);
>>--
>>1.8.4
>>
>
>---
>	-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com
>