![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Le Thursday 26 April 2007 22:44:59 Jay Vosburgh, vous avez écrit : > Chris Snook <csnook@redhat.com> wrote: > >Vincent ETIENNE wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Summary : > >> Got this trace when one network interface come down or up in a 2 > >> interfaces bonding. So far, system seems to survive to this problem > >> and works fine. > > > This problem looks to be one of the known locking issues with > bonding. > > Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net> and I have been working > offline on the locking issues in bonding over the last several weeks. > At the moment, we have a generally stable (but ugly with debug fluff and > other yuckies) patch that seems to resolve at least the majority of the > various issues. I'm thinking to clean it up for general posting early > next week, and address additional problems from there (since it's > hopefully at least a big step forward). > > -J Any news and/or patch concerning this problem ?. Not intended to stress you but time goes on... Do you think a solution could be found in a relatively short timeframe (and i will delay a bit final installation) or is it better to go without bonding and do an upgrade later ?. Vincent > > --- > -Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-05-09 20:51 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||