Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755533AbZCAGV5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2009 01:21:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751774AbZCAGVq (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2009 01:21:46 -0500 Received: from 2605ds1-ynoe.1.fullrate.dk ([90.184.12.24]:40173 "EHLO shrek.krogh.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751692AbZCAGVq (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Mar 2009 01:21:46 -0500 Message-ID: <49AA2973.7040209@krogh.cc> Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 07:21:39 +0100 From: Jesper Krogh User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jay Vosburgh CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff Garzik , aowi@novozymes.com Subject: Re: Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 - bisected 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> In-Reply-To: <30478.1235766943@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1446 Lines: 40 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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/