Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 08:04:07PM CET, [email protected] wrote: >On Sat, 2011-03-12 at 10:59 -0800, David Miller wrote: >> From: Jiri Pirko <[email protected]> >> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:01:10 +0100 >> >> > Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 02:09:18AM CET, [email protected] wrote: >> >>On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 01:55 -0800, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >>> Or perhaps this should be applied to net-next? >> >>> >> >>I think this should go through scsi-misc as all the other >> >>libfc/libfcoe/fcoe patches do. >> >> >> >>> Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 07:05:35AM CET, [email protected] wrote: >> >>> >Check for bonding master and refuse to use that. >> >>> > >> >>> >Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <[email protected]> >> >>> >--- >> >>> > drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c | 4 +--- >> >>> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >>> > >> >>> >diff --git a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c >> >>> >index 9f9600b..3becc6a 100644 >> >>> >--- a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c >> >>> >+++ b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c >> >>> >@@ -285,9 +285,7 @@ static int fcoe_interface_setup(struct >> >>> >fcoe_interface *fcoe, >> >>> > } >> >>> > >> >>> > /* Do not support for bonding device */ >> >>> >- if ((netdev->priv_flags & IFF_MASTER_ALB) || >> >>> >- (netdev->priv_flags & IFF_SLAVE_INACTIVE) || >> >>> >- (netdev->priv_flags & IFF_MASTER_8023AD)) { >> >>> >+ if (netdev->priv_flags & IFF_BONDING && netdev->flags & >> >>> >IFF_MASTER) { >> >>> > FCOE_NETDEV_DBG(netdev, "Bonded interfaces not >> >>> > supported\n"); >> >>> > return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> >>> > } >> >>> >-- >> >>> >1.7.3.4 >> >>> > >> >> >> >>James, feel free to pick up this patch. I don't have anything in my fcoe >> >>tree right now that it would conflict with. I'll also put it in my tree >> >>and resend if you don't put it into scsi-misc directly. >> > >> > What's the status of this? Maybe this should rather go thru net-next >> >> Sure, I can take this. I'll look at it later. > >Hi Dave, > > I'd rather have this patch go through scsi-misc. Most, if not all, >libfc, libfcoe and fcoe patches have taken this path. The way it has >been working is that I have been collecting fcoe patches and re-posting >them to scsi-misc after I have reviewed them and done some basic >testing. > > Taking a patch like this through net{-next} could cause a merge >problem at Linus' level if a later patch makes it though the normal >process and conflicts. This is what I want to avoid. > > This patch, although appreciated, isn't critical. I have collected it >into my tree and will re-post it to scsi-misc. I see no reason to treat >this patch differently from other patches.
Well I have another set of patches dependent on this one :( > > Ultimately I just want things to go smoothly, so I'll leave it up to >James and you to figure out what to do. > >Thanks, //Rob > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.open-fcoe.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
