Message ID | 4086.1241463817@death.nxdomain.ibm.com |
---|---|
State | Accepted, archived |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:03:37 -0700 > Paul Smith <paul@mad-scientist.net> wrote: > >>Hi Jay/David/etc.; >> >>This patch is critical for me to properly use mode 6 (balance-alb) >>bonding; I assume it will be needed for others as well. I haven't >>checked to see if it's still necessary in 2.6.29/2.6.30, but I didn't >>notice it going into the latest 2.6.27.22, released today. >> >>Is this still unofficial? Is there an official patch on the horizon? > > David, please apply and queue for -stable: Greg just posted that there will be no further 2.6.27.x -stable releases after the one he just made. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:06 -0700, David Miller wrote: > Greg just posted that there will be no further 2.6.27.x -stable > releases after the one he just made. Really? That seems odd. Everything I heard for the last 7 months or so, even as late as last month, seemed to imply that 2.6.27 was going to be the next long-term supported kernel, taking over from 2.6.16, and that it would be supported for "years". Maybe Adrian is taking over 2.6.27.x maintenance from Greg? Was this posted on lkml? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Paul Smith <paul@mad-scientist.net> Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 18:38:14 -0400 > On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:06 -0700, David Miller wrote: >> Greg just posted that there will be no further 2.6.27.x -stable >> releases after the one he just made. > > Really? That seems odd. Everything I heard for the last 7 months or > so, even as late as last month, seemed to imply that 2.6.27 was going to > be the next long-term supported kernel, taking over from 2.6.16, and > that it would be supported for "years". The reality of the situation is that someone has to do the work. > Maybe Adrian is taking over 2.6.27.x maintenance from Greg? I have no idea. > Was this posted on lkml? Yes. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: >From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> >Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:03:37 -0700 > >> Paul Smith <paul@mad-scientist.net> wrote: >> >>>Hi Jay/David/etc.; >>> >>>This patch is critical for me to properly use mode 6 (balance-alb) >>>bonding; I assume it will be needed for others as well. I haven't >>>checked to see if it's still necessary in 2.6.29/2.6.30, but I didn't >>>notice it going into the latest 2.6.27.22, released today. >>> >>>Is this still unofficial? Is there an official patch on the horizon? >> >> David, please apply and queue for -stable: > >Greg just posted that there will be no further 2.6.27.x -stable >releases after the one he just made. Regardless of the -stable situation, the patch is still needed for the current mainline (sorry if that wasn't clear). I checked it against the current net-2.6 and net-next-2.6 trees, and it should apply to either one. -J --- -Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 16:00:51 -0700 > Regardless of the -stable situation, the patch is still needed > for the current mainline (sorry if that wasn't clear). I checked it > against the current net-2.6 and net-next-2.6 trees, and it should apply > to either one. I didn't realize that, ok I'll unmark it in patchwork and get to it soon. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:06 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> > Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:03:37 -0700 > > > Paul Smith <paul@mad-scientist.net> wrote: > > > >>Hi Jay/David/etc.; > >> > >>This patch is critical for me to properly use mode 6 (balance-alb) > >>bonding; I assume it will be needed for others as well. I haven't > >>checked to see if it's still necessary in 2.6.29/2.6.30, but I didn't > >>notice it going into the latest 2.6.27.22, released today. > >> > >>Is this still unofficial? Is there an official patch on the horizon? > > > > David, please apply and queue for -stable: > > Greg just posted that there will be no further 2.6.27.x -stable > releases after the one he just made. It's 2.6.28.x that he's dropping now <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/831202>, not .27.x - he'll have to support the latter for years in SLES 11 anyway. Ben.
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 00:05:12 +0100 > On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 12:06 -0700, David Miller wrote: >> From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> >> Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:03:37 -0700 >> >> > Paul Smith <paul@mad-scientist.net> wrote: >> > >> >>Hi Jay/David/etc.; >> >> >> >>This patch is critical for me to properly use mode 6 (balance-alb) >> >>bonding; I assume it will be needed for others as well. I haven't >> >>checked to see if it's still necessary in 2.6.29/2.6.30, but I didn't >> >>notice it going into the latest 2.6.27.22, released today. >> >> >> >>Is this still unofficial? Is there an official patch on the horizon? >> > >> > David, please apply and queue for -stable: >> >> Greg just posted that there will be no further 2.6.27.x -stable >> releases after the one he just made. > > It's 2.6.28.x that he's dropping now > <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/831202>, not .27.x - he'll > have to support the latter for years in SLES 11 anyway. Yes he just corrected me about this in private email. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Whew! I was a bit worried there :-) Can we re-queue this for 2.6.27-stable then? I've got the patch already building in my tree but it'd be nice to get it there by default going forward. Cheers! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 2009 12:03:37 -0700 > David, please apply and queue for -stable: Done. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c index 553a899..46d312b 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c @@ -1706,10 +1706,8 @@ void bond_alb_handle_active_change(struct bonding *bond, struct slave *new_slave * Called with RTNL */ int bond_alb_set_mac_address(struct net_device *bond_dev, void *addr) - __releases(&bond->curr_slave_lock) - __releases(&bond->lock) __acquires(&bond->lock) - __acquires(&bond->curr_slave_lock) + __releases(&bond->lock) { struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev); struct sockaddr *sa = addr; @@ -1745,9 +1743,6 @@ int bond_alb_set_mac_address(struct net_device *bond_dev, void *addr) } } - write_unlock_bh(&bond->curr_slave_lock); - read_unlock(&bond->lock); - if (swap_slave) { alb_swap_mac_addr(bond, swap_slave, bond->curr_active_slave); alb_fasten_mac_swap(bond, swap_slave, bond->curr_active_slave); @@ -1755,16 +1750,15 @@ int bond_alb_set_mac_address(struct net_device *bond_dev, void *addr) alb_set_slave_mac_addr(bond->curr_active_slave, bond_dev->dev_addr, bond->alb_info.rlb_enabled); + read_lock(&bond->lock); alb_send_learning_packets(bond->curr_active_slave, bond_dev->dev_addr); if (bond->alb_info.rlb_enabled) { /* inform clients mac address has changed */ rlb_req_update_slave_clients(bond, bond->curr_active_slave); } + read_unlock(&bond->lock); } - read_lock(&bond->lock); - write_lock_bh(&bond->curr_slave_lock); - return 0; }