From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesper Krogh Subject: Re: Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 - bisected Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 07:21:39 +0100 Message-ID: <49AA2973.7040209@krogh.cc> References: <491FEAD5.4090205@krogh.cc> <49A7B17F.2020408@krogh.cc> <16084.1235752119@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> <49A84802.7030502@krogh.cc> <30478.1235766943@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff Garzik , aowi@novozymes.com To: Jay Vosburgh Return-path: In-Reply-To: <30478.1235766943@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Jay Vosburgh wrote: > Jesper Krogh wrote: > >> Jay Vosburgh wrote: >>> Jesper Krogh wrote: >>> [...] >>>> The offending commit seems to be: >>>> >>>> A test with a fresh 2.6.29-rc6 revealed that the problem has been fixed >>>> subsequently.. but still exists in 2.6.27-newest. (havent tested >>>> 2.6.28-newest yet). >>>> >>>> Any ideas of what the "fixing" commit is .. or should that also be >>>> bisected? >>> I went back and looked at your earlier mail. Since you're using >>> 802.3ad mode, my first guess would be this commit: >>> >>> commit fd989c83325cb34795bc4d4aa6b13c06f90eac99 > > I'll compile 2.6.28.7 here and see if it works for me. I appreciate that you spend time on it, but my feeling is that it definately isn't reproducible in all environments (otherwise we would probably have seen a large cry by now). I'm trying to bisect the "fix" down and hope that'll tell us something more. If you do the test, remember, that it is not like "bonding isn't working". It just fails to initialize correctly at bootup and doesnt get the link state by itself. Subsequently doing a /etc/init.d/networking restart brigs it correct up. -- Jesper