From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Veaceslav Falico Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] bonding: handle slave's name change with primary_slave logic Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:33:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20140114173301.GC1867@redhat.com> References: <1389700179-12723-1-git-send-email-vfalico@redhat.com> <4299.1389720779@death.nxdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ding Tianhong , Andy Gospodarek To: Jay Vosburgh Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:61358 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751642AbaANRgG (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:36:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4299.1389720779@death.nxdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:32:59AM -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote: >Veaceslav Falico 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 >>CC: Ding Tianhong >>CC: Jay Vosburgh >>CC: Andy Gospodarek >>Signed-off-by: Veaceslav Falico >>--- >> 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 >