lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [Patch net-next-2.6] netpoll: disable netpoll when enslave a device
    On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 01:13:29PM +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
    > 于 2011年05月18日 18:56, Neil Horman 写道:
    > >On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:00:35PM +0800, Amerigo Wang wrote:
    > ...
    > >>- case NETDEV_GOING_DOWN:
    > >> case NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE:
    > >>+ case NETDEV_ENSLAVE:
    > >> nt->enabled = 0;
    > >> stopped = true;
    > >> break;
    > >This wasn't introduced by this patch, but looking at it made me realize that
    > >nt->enabled, if it passes through this code path, doesn't properly track weather
    > >or not netpoll_setup has been called on this interface. If you look at
    > >drop_netconsole_target, you'll see we only call netpoll_cleanup_target if
    > >nt->enabled is set. We should probably change the nt->enabled check there, and
    > >in store_enabled to be if (nt->np.dev), like we do in the NETDEV_UNREGISTER case
    > >in netconsole_netdev_event.
    >
    > Yeah, also note that we can change ->enabled via configfs too.
    > I guess we probably need to fix this in another patch...
    >
    Yeah, or you can roll it into this one, I think this is the only location that
    needs fixing.

    >
    > >>+#define NETDEV_ENSLAVE 0x0014
    > >>
    > >Nit:
    > >Shouldn't this be NETDEV_BONDING_ENSLAVE, to keep it in line with
    > >NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE above?
    >
    > Actually that is my first thought, but I plan to use this in bridge
    > case too, because using netconsole on a device underlying a bridge
    > makes little sense too. Thus, I prefer NETDEV_ENSLAVE to
    > NETDEV_BONDING_ENSLAVE.
    >
    That seems reasonable, but if its going to be more generic, could you change
    NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE to NETDEV_DESLAVE?

    > >
    > >> #define SYS_DOWN 0x0001 /* Notify of system down */
    > >> #define SYS_RESTART SYS_DOWN
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > >Other than those two points, this looks good to me
    >
    > Thanks for review.
    Thank you!

    --
    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: 2011-05-19 13:05    [W:0.023 / U:0.832 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site