Re: [PATCH] bonding:update speed/duplex for NETDEV_CHANGE

[Ben Hutchings]

On Mon, 2011-10-31 at 13:32 -0700, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
[...]
> 	This particular case arises only during enslavement.  The call
> to bond_update_speed_duplex call has failed, but the device is marked by
> bonding to be up.  Bonding complains that the device isn't down, but it
> cannot get speed and duplex, and therefore is assuming them to be
> 100/Full.
> 
> 	The catch is that this happens only for the ARP monitor, because
> it initially presumes a slave to be up regardless of actual carrier
> state (for historical reasons related to very old 10 or 10/100 drivers,
> prior to the introduction of netif_carrier_*).

Right, I gathered that.  Is there any reason to use the ARP monitor when
all slaves support link state notification?  Maybe the bonding
documentation should recommend miimon in section 7, not just in section
2.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/