Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760100AbZCMX1Z (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:27:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752251AbZCMX1N (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:27:13 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:56976 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751223AbZCMX1M (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:27:12 -0400 From: Jay Vosburgh To: David Miller cc: jesper@krogh.cc, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@redhat.com, aowi@novozymes.com Subject: Re: Regression in bonding between 2.6.26.8 and 2.6.27.6 - bisected - twice In-reply-to: <20090313.161217.52045656.davem@davemloft.net> References: <49AA8B4F.8090405@krogh.cc> <9712.1236279072@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> <49B581D3.6060807@krogh.cc> <20090313.161217.52045656.davem@davemloft.net> Comments: In-reply-to David Miller message dated "Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:12:17 -0700." X-Mailer: MH-E 8.0.3; nmh 1.3-RC3; GNU Emacs 22.2.1 Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:27:16 -0700 Message-ID: <8799.1236986836@death.nxdomain.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4273 Lines: 126 David Miller wrote: >From: Jesper Krogh >Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:53:39 +0100 > >> Jay Vosburgh wrote: >> > However, I did find another bug I introduced during the "mii >> > refactor" patch that you mentioned as being the original source of the >> > problem. That bug will cause 802.3ad to not notice speed changes. >> > Could you test the patch below on your 2.6.68.7 and/or 2.6.27.19 >> > and see if it resolves your problem (without the forcedeth patch)? >> >> There was something missing from the header to make it compile.. I found that in a later version. Patch below fixed the problem (without the forcedeth patch). > >Jay please resend this with proper signoffs etc. if you want >me to apply it. I posted it again with the usual stuff a day or two after I posted the test patch; I'll append it to the end of this email. Note that the below patch has a minor cosmetic change from the test patch. I believe this fix should go to -stable for 2.6.26 and 2.6.27, but it'll need the change Jesper added to pick up a macro that was added to mainline: diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h b/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h index fb730ec..b1315e4 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bonding.h @@ -248,6 +248,14 @@ static inline struct bonding *bond_get_bond_by_slave(struct slave *slave) return (struct bonding *)slave->dev->master->priv; } +static inline bool bond_is_lb(const struct bonding *bond) +{ + return bond->params.mode == BOND_MODE_TLB + || bond->params.mode == BOND_MODE_ALB; +} + + + #define BOND_FOM_NONE 0 #define BOND_FOM_ACTIVE 1 #define BOND_FOM_FOLLOW 2 The above fragment isn't needed for mainline, only for -stable. -J From: Jay Vosburgh To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: "David S. Miller" , stable@kernel.org Subject: [PATCH net-next-2.6] bonding: Fix updating of speed/duplex changes Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:27:33 -0800 This patch corrects an omission from the following commit: commit f0c76d61779b153dbfb955db3f144c62d02173c2 Author: Jay Vosburgh Date: Wed Jul 2 18:21:58 2008 -0700 bonding: refactor mii monitor The un-refactored code checked the link speed and duplex of every slave on every pass; the refactored code did not do so. The 802.3ad and balance-alb/tlb modes utilize the speed and duplex information, and require it to be kept up to date. This patch adds a notifier check to perform the appropriate updating when the slave device speed changes. Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh --- drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c index bfe1ed8..dce3cf9 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c @@ -3545,11 +3545,26 @@ static int bond_slave_netdev_event(unsigned long event, struct net_device *slave } break; case NETDEV_CHANGE: - /* - * TODO: is this what we get if somebody - * sets up a hierarchical bond, then rmmod's - * one of the slave bonding devices? - */ + if (bond->params.mode == BOND_MODE_8023AD || bond_is_lb(bond)) { + struct slave *slave; + + slave = bond_get_slave_by_dev(bond, slave_dev); + if (slave) { + u16 old_speed = slave->speed; + u16 old_duplex = slave->duplex; + + bond_update_speed_duplex(slave); + + if (bond_is_lb(bond)) + break; + + if (old_speed != slave->speed) + bond_3ad_adapter_speed_changed(slave); + if (old_duplex != slave->duplex) + bond_3ad_adapter_duplex_changed(slave); + } + } + break; case NETDEV_DOWN: /* -- 1.6.0.2 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- 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/