netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>
To: zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Tantilov,
	Emil S" <emil.s.tantilov@intel.com>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com>,
	dingtianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@cumulusnetworks.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] bonding: don't use stale speed and duplex information
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 21:39:52 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7949.1456724392@famine> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56CFB6BF.3070705@gmail.com>

zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 02/25/2016 09:33 PM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>> zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> I delved into the source code and Emil's tests. I think that the problem
>>> that this patch expects to fix occurs very unusually.
>>>
>>> Do you agree with me?
>>>
>>> If so, maybe the following patch can reduce the performance loss.
>>> Please comment on it. Thanks a lot.
>>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> index b7f1a99..c4c511a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> @@ -2129,7 +2129,9 @@ static void bond_miimon_commit(struct bonding *bond)
>>>                         continue;
>>>
>>>                 case BOND_LINK_UP:
>>> -                       bond_update_speed_duplex(slave);
>>> +                       if (slave->speed == SPEED_UNKNOWN)
>>> +                               bond_update_speed_duplex(slave);
>>> +
>>>                         bond_set_slave_link_state(slave, BOND_LINK_UP,
>>> BOND_SLAVE_NOTIFY_NOW);
>>>                         slave->last_link_up = jiffies;
>> 	I don't believe the speed is necessarily SPEED_UNKNOWN coming in
>> here.  If the race occurs at a time later than the initial enslavement,
>> speed may already be set (and the race manifests if the new speed
>> changes, i.e., the link changes from 1 Gb/sec to 10 Gb/sec), so I don't
>> think this is functionally correct.
>Hi, Jay
>
>Thanks for your reply.
>
>IMHO, "If the race occurs at a time later than the initial enslavement,
>speed may already be set (and the race manifests if the new speed
>changes, i.e., the link changes from 1 Gb/sec to 10 Gb/sec)", from my test,
>this will not happen because the previous source code make the speed
>correct.

	How, exactly, will "the previous source code make the speed
correct"?

>This "bond_update_speed_duplex" repeats to get the correct speed.
>
>That is, this patch is to fix the error in initial enslavement. The
>mentioned scenario will not occur.

	I see nothing in the code that limits the race to happening only
at enslavement time.

	If the bond_mii_monitor call executes between the device going
link up and the arrival of the NETDEV_CHANGE or NETDEV_UP callback, the
stored speed and duplex are stale.  The stale speed value is not
guaranteed to be SPEED_UNKNOWN, so your patch is not functionally
correct.

	-J

>Even though the performance impact is minimal, if we can avoid this
>performance
>impact, why not ?
>
>Best Regards!
>Zhu Yanjun
>
>>
>> 	Also, the call to bond_miimon_commit itself is already gated by
>> bond_miimon_inspect finding a link state change.  The performance impact
>> here should be minimal.
>>
>> 	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@canonical.com

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-29  5:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-08 20:10 [PATCH v2 net] bonding: don't use stale speed and duplex information Jay Vosburgh
2016-02-14  2:36 ` Ding Tianhong
2016-02-16 20:14 ` David Miller
2016-02-18 20:25   ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-02-18 20:27     ` David Miller
2016-02-25  8:35 ` zhuyj
2016-02-25 13:33   ` Jay Vosburgh
2016-02-26  2:21     ` zhuyj
2016-02-29  5:39       ` Jay Vosburgh [this message]
2016-02-29  6:41         ` zhuyj

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7949.1456724392@famine \
    --to=jay.vosburgh@canonical.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
    --cc=emil.s.tantilov@intel.com \
    --cc=gospo@cumulusnetworks.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vfalico@gmail.com \
    --cc=zyjzyj2000@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).