From: Lars Everbrand <lars.everbrand@protonmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@gmail.com>,
Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@gmail.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bonding: correct rr balancing during link failure
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 21:32:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <X9krelP/8MwGP0V5@black-debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201205114513.4886d15e@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
On Sat, Dec 05, 2020 at 11:45:13AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Thanks for the patch!
Kind words for my first attempt at this. Sorry for answering a bit late,
proton-bridge is not my best friend lately.
>
> Looking at the code in question it feels a little like we're breaking
> abstractions if we bump the counter directly in get_slave_by_id.
My intention was to avoid a big change, and this was the easiest way. I
trust your opinion here.
>
> For one thing when the function is called for IGMP packets the counter
> should not be incremented at all. But also if packets_per_slave is not
> 1 we'd still be hitting the same leg multiple times (packets_per_slave
> / 2). So it seems like we should round the counter up somehow?
I did not consider this case, I only test =1 and random. Yeah, it breaks
if the counter is updated per packet in any >1 case.
>
> For IGMP maybe we don't have to call bond_get_slave_by_id() at all,
> IMHO, just find first leg that can TX. Then we can restructure
> bond_get_slave_by_id() appropriately for the non-IGMP case.
I can have another look but my I am not confident that I am skilled
enough in this area to produce a larger overhaul...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-15 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-02 20:55 [PATCH net-next] bonding: correct rr balancing during link failure Lars Everbrand
2020-12-05 19:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-12-08 21:46 ` Jay Vosburgh
2020-12-15 21:54 ` Lars Everbrand
2020-12-15 21:32 ` Lars Everbrand [this message]
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=X9krelP/8MwGP0V5@black-debian \
--to=lars.everbrand@protonmail.com \
--cc=andy@greyhouse.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=j.vosburgh@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vfalico@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).