It's always wrong to copy symbols from another module without
referencing it.
Michael,
It seems like the preferred approach is to prevent ib_ipoib from being
unloaded while bonding is on top it, right?
It seems like it would handle all safety issues (not just neigh cleanup).
-
To
Quoting Moni Shoua [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: Re: Re: [PATCH V3 0/7] net/bonding: ADD IPoIB
support for?the bonding driver
It's always wrong to copy symbols from another module without
referencing it.
Michael,
It seems like the preferred approach
Roland Dreier wrote:
1. When bonding enslaves an IPoIB device the bonding neighbor holds a
reference to a cleanup function in the IPoIB drives. This makes it unsafe
to
unload the IPoIB module if there are bonding neighbors in the air. So, to
avoid this race one must unload bonding
Quoting Moni Shoua [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH V3 0/7] net/bonding: ADD IPoIB support for?the
bonding driver
Roland Dreier wrote:
1. When bonding enslaves an IPoIB device the bonding neighbor holds a
reference to a cleanup function in the IPoIB drives. This makes
Quoting Or Gerlitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH V3 0/7] net/bonding: ADD IPoIB support for?the
bonding driver
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Maybe we could use hard_header_cache/header_cache_update methods instead of
neighbour cleanup calls.
To do this, it is possible
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Maybe we could use hard_header_cache/header_cache_update methods instead of
neighbour cleanup calls.
To do this, it is possible that we'll have to switch from storing pointers
inside the neighbour to keeping an index there, but I expect the
performance impact to be
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Quoting Or Gerlitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To be precise, bonding will copy all the symbols it copies today from
the slave module (ipoib), see bond_setup_by_slave() in patch 3/7
Not really.
This copying of symbols is something that you added, isn't it?
So with this
Quoting Or Gerlitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/7] net/bonding: ADD IPoIB support for?the?bonding
driver
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Quoting Or Gerlitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To be precise, bonding will copy all the symbols it copies today from
the slave module (ipoib), see
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Quoting Or Gerlitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
It's always wrong to copy symbols from another module without
referencing it.
Its the --first-- time you make this comment,
It's really a well known fact. That's where the crash
with modprobe -r
This patch series is the third version (see below link to V2) of the
suggested changes to the bonding driver so it would be able to support
non ARPHRD_ETHER netdevices for its High-Availability (active-backup) mode.
The motivation is to enable the bonding driver on its HA mode to work with
1. When bonding enslaves an IPoIB device the bonding neighbor holds a
reference to a cleanup function in the IPoIB drives. This makes it unsafe to
unload the IPoIB module if there are bonding neighbors in the air. So, to
avoid this race one must unload bonding before unloading IPoIB.
11 matches
Mail list logo
