RE: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

RE: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Hen, Shmulik]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:jgarzik@pobox.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 12:52 AM
> To: Hen, Shmulik
> Cc: bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; netdev@oss.sgi.com
> Subject: Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6
> 
> 
> Shmulik Hen wrote:
> > This is set 2 that merges parts of Jay Vosburgh's experimental
> > propagation stuff from 5/22 with all the fixes/enhancements
> > we've developed according to the RFC published on bond-devel
> > list on 6/2.
> > 
> > Applies on 2.4.22. Assumes patch set 1 was already applied.
> 
> 
> As Jay mentioned he had approved through the end of set 2, and set 2 
> looks good to me, I applied all 8 patches to 2.4.
> 

Does that mean patch set 2 was also applied ?
Because that was the first thing to do to get versions synched.

> Let's now take an operational pause in 2.4, and get 2.6 back 
> into sync. 
>   Would some hearty bonding team member(s) be willing to do that?
> 

After patch set 1, It should be as easy as just copying all the
bonding related files from 2.4 to 2.6. I guess I can do that on
Sunday if someone hasn't already done it before.

> I would _really_ prefer that the revision history be 
> maintained, which 
> makes it a non-trivial exercise, time-wise...

Where should that be maintained ?
I could suggest the CVS on SFG.


	Shmulik.

Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Jeff Garzik]

Hen, Shmulik wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jeff Garzik [mailto:jgarzik@pobox.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 12:52 AM
>>To: Hen, Shmulik
>>Cc: bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; netdev@oss.sgi.com
>>Subject: Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6
>>
>>
>>Shmulik Hen wrote:
>>
>>>This is set 2 that merges parts of Jay Vosburgh's experimental
>>>propagation stuff from 5/22 with all the fixes/enhancements
>>>we've developed according to the RFC published on bond-devel
>>>list on 6/2.
>>>
>>>Applies on 2.4.22. Assumes patch set 1 was already applied.
>>
>>
>>As Jay mentioned he had approved through the end of set 2, and set 2 
>>looks good to me, I applied all 8 patches to 2.4.
>>
> 
> 
> Does that mean patch set 2 was also applied ?

Yes.


>>Let's now take an operational pause in 2.4, and get 2.6 back 
>>into sync. 
>>  Would some hearty bonding team member(s) be willing to do that?
>>
> 
> 
> After patch set 1, It should be as easy as just copying all the
> bonding related files from 2.4 to 2.6. I guess I can do that on
> Sunday if someone hasn't already done it before.

I had hoped to preserve the revision history.  Simply copying the files 
over does not do that :(

What I mean by preserving revision history is, changes should be 
submitted to 2.6 in the same granularity as they were to 2.4...

	Jeff

Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Shmulik Hen]

On Thursday 28 August 2003 07:02 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Hen, Shmulik wrote:
> > After patch set 1, It should be as easy as just copying all the
> > bonding related files from 2.4 to 2.6. I guess I can do that on
> > Sunday if someone hasn't already done it before.
>
> I had hoped to preserve the revision history.  Simply copying the
> files over does not do that :(
>
> What I mean by preserving revision history is, changes should be
> submitted to 2.6 in the same granularity as they were to 2.4...
>

God, I wish I was an English speaking person...  :(
Amir, on the other hand, understood exactly what you intended, so 
there should be something ready for tomorrow that brings 2.6 to the 
same point as 2.4 after set 1, in small steps. After that, sets 2 and 
3 could be applied the same way for 2.4 and 2.6.


	Shmulik.

Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Ben Greear]

Shmulik Hen wrote:
> On Thursday 28 August 2003 07:02 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
>>Hen, Shmulik wrote:
>>
>>>After patch set 1, It should be as easy as just copying all the
>>>bonding related files from 2.4 to 2.6. I guess I can do that on
>>>Sunday if someone hasn't already done it before.
>>
>>I had hoped to preserve the revision history.  Simply copying the
>>files over does not do that :(
>>
>>What I mean by preserving revision history is, changes should be
>>submitted to 2.6 in the same granularity as they were to 2.4...
>>
> 
> 
> God, I wish I was an English speaking person...  :(

Don't feel bad, I had no clue what he was asking for
either :)

Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Jeff Garzik]

Shmulik Hen wrote:
> On Thursday 28 August 2003 07:02 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
>>Hen, Shmulik wrote:
>>
>>>After patch set 1, It should be as easy as just copying all the
>>>bonding related files from 2.4 to 2.6. I guess I can do that on
>>>Sunday if someone hasn't already done it before.
>>
>>I had hoped to preserve the revision history.  Simply copying the
>>files over does not do that :(
>>
>>What I mean by preserving revision history is, changes should be
>>submitted to 2.6 in the same granularity as they were to 2.4...
>>
> 
> 
> God, I wish I was an English speaking person...  :(
> Amir, on the other hand, understood exactly what you intended, so 
> there should be something ready for tomorrow that brings 2.6 to the 
> same point as 2.4 after set 1, in small steps. After that, sets 2 and 
> 3 could be applied the same way for 2.4 and 2.6.


No worries.  Even I don't understand myself sometimes.  :)

	Jeff

RE: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Hen, Shmulik]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hen, Shmulik 
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 10:40 PM
> To: Jeff Garzik
> Cc: bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; netdev@oss.sgi.com
> Subject: Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6
> 
> On Thursday 28 August 2003 07:02 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Hen, Shmulik wrote:
> > > After patch set 1, It should be as easy as just copying all the
> > > bonding related files from 2.4 to 2.6. I guess I can do that on
> > > Sunday if someone hasn't already done it before.
> >
> > I had hoped to preserve the revision history.  Simply copying the
> > files over does not do that :(
> >
> > What I mean by preserving revision history is, changes should be
> > submitted to 2.6 in the same granularity as they were to 2.4...
> >
> 
> Amir, on the other hand, understood exactly what you intended, so 
> there should be something ready for tomorrow that brings 2.6 to the 
> same point as 2.4 after set 1, in small steps. After that, sets 2 and 
> 3 could be applied the same way for 2.4 and 2.6.
> 

May have spoken a bit too soon. It seems it won't be possible
to get sets 2 and 3 to apply the same way for 2.4 and 2.6.
In 2.6, things like MOD_{INC|DEC}_USE_COUNT are already gone,
and struct initializers have already been converted to c99
style. Probably some other things as well. Since we don't want
the code to have ugly ifdefs in it, we'll need to either split
the code :(, or backport more stuff from 2.6 to 2.4 :).

We'll have to get back to that later this week (probably
not before Wednesday, since there is a pressing internal
deadline for us due by Tuesday).


	Shmulik.

[bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Shmulik Hen]

This is set 2 that merges parts of Jay Vosburgh's experimental
propagation stuff from 5/22 with all the fixes/enhancements
we've developed according to the RFC published on bond-devel
list on 6/2.

Applies on 2.4.22. Assumes patch set 1 was already applied.

patch set can be downloaded from:
http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/bonding/patch_set_2_propagation.tar.bz2

This will update the following files:

	drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
	drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.h
	drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h
	drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c

Description:
patch 1 - Distinguish between modes that use a primary slave from
	  those that don't, and propagate settings accordingly; Consolidate
	  change_active opeartions and add reselect_active and find_best
	  opeartions.
patch 2 - Change monitoring function use the above functionality.
patch 3 - Modes that don't use primary don't use the above 
	  functionality.
patch 4 - Decouple promiscuous handling from the multicast mode 
	  setting.
patch 5 - Add support for changing HW address and MTU with proper 
	  unwind in old modes.
patch 6 - Same thing for ALB/TLB modes.
patch 7 - Consolidate /proc code, add CHANGENAME handler
patch 8 - Enhance netdev notification handling.
	  Add comment block and bump version.

-- 
| Shmulik Hen   Advanced Network Services  |
| Israel Design Center, Jerusalem          |
| LAN Access Division, Platform Networking |
| Intel Communications Group, Intel corp.  |

Re: [bonding][2/3] Synchronizing 2.4-2.6

[Jeff Garzik]

Shmulik Hen wrote:
> This is set 2 that merges parts of Jay Vosburgh's experimental
> propagation stuff from 5/22 with all the fixes/enhancements
> we've developed according to the RFC published on bond-devel
> list on 6/2.
> 
> Applies on 2.4.22. Assumes patch set 1 was already applied.


As Jay mentioned he had approved through the end of set 2, and set 2 
looks good to me, I applied all 8 patches to 2.4.

Let's now take an operational pause in 2.4, and get 2.6 back into sync. 
  Would some hearty bonding team member(s) be willing to do that?

I would _really_ prefer that the revision history be maintained, which 
makes it a non-trivial exercise, time-wise...

	Jeff