Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-08-20 Thread Christophe Devriese
This fixes my issue. Thanks. On Tuesday 15 August 2006 02:09, you wrote: > From: Jay Vosburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 18:01:35 -0700 > > > In this case (bond0.555 above bond0 above eth0,eth1,etc), > > skb_bond doesn't suppress duplicates because skb_bond is called with the

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-08-14 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Friday 11 August 2006 08:45, you wrote: > From: Krzysztof Oledzki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:18:23 +0200 (CEST) > > > OK, this patch really solves the bug from my report. Are there any > > chances for similar fix in the net-2.6.19.git? > > I'm still thinking about this patch

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-08-11 Thread Christophe Devriese
gt; > I'm still thinking about this patch and what various people have > explained about the situation. What can I do to get you to apply this then ? This patch is about fixing a bug which is bothering me a lot. Regards, Christophe Devriese - To unsubscribe from this list: send the l

Re: Stackable devices.

2006-08-09 Thread Christophe Devriese
It would however be considerable effort to do this. Is this going to end up unapplied like my last patch, or ? Regards, Christophe On Tuesday 08 August 2006 18:36, you wrote: > Christophe Devriese wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 10:50:08AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > >>Cur

Re: Stackable devices.

2006-08-08 Thread Christophe Devriese
system like this. It would need to catch both the vlan accelerated path and the normal path. -- --- Christophe Devriese EURiD Network Adminstrator / Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-08-03 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 22:58, you wrote: > From: Christophe Devriese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:15:40 +0200 > > Thanks for the detailed explanation. > > > If you bond 2 vlan subinterfaces, the patch is not necessary at all. In > > that ca

Re: Linville's L2 rant... -- Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-08-02 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 19:21, you wrote: > John W. Linville wrote: > >>>I'm just not sure that cleverness is worth the headache, especially > >>>since the most clever things usually only work by accident... > >> > >>Or, work by solid, modular design and small tweaks! > > > > Point taken.  But st

Re: Linville's L2 rant... -- Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-07-31 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Monday 31 July 2006 14:30, you wrote: > (This is not directed at Christophe, or anyone in particular...) > > > > Am I the only one that thinks that our handling of LAN L2 stuff > is at best a little "too" flexible (and at worst a collection of > nasty hacks)? > > I mean, do we really need both

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-07-31 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Monday 31 July 2006 05:50, you wrote: > From: Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:55:17 -0700 > > > The skb_bond method assigns skb->dev when it does the 'keep', > > but the VLAN code immediately over-writes the skb->dev when > > searching for the vlan device. > > > > What

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-07-28 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 03:08:49PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > Christophe Devriese wrote: > >On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 02:55:17PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > > >>Christophe Devriese wrote: > >> > >>>I basically move the skb_bond method into if_bonding.h,

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-07-28 Thread Christophe Devriese
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 02:55:17PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > Christophe Devriese wrote: > >I basically move the skb_bond method into if_bonding.h, include that file > >in if_vlan ( and call it from the vlan forwarding path, and the netif_rx > >routine ). > > &g

Re: PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-07-28 Thread Christophe Devriese
t; > { > >struct softnet_data *sd = &__get_cpu_var(softnet_data); > > > > > -- > Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of

PATCH Fix bonding active-backup behavior for VLAN interfaces

2006-07-28 Thread Christophe Devriese
ev->master; - } - - return dev; -} - static void net_tx_action(struct softirq_action *h) { struct softnet_data *sd = &__get_cpu_var(softnet_data); -- --- Christophe Devriese

Bonding active-backup issue.

2006-07-26 Thread Christophe Devriese
If I implement a patch taking an unused flag and implementing IFF_SILENT, in order to fix incorrect bonding active-backup behavior, will it get accepted ? If not, what can I do ? -- --- Christophe Devriese

Re: Who maintains the website ?

2006-07-26 Thread Christophe Devriese
I have created the http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/VLAN page. What do you think ? Regards, Christophe On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 08:52:52PM +1200, Ian McDonald wrote: > On 7/26/06, Christophe Devriese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I would like to have a VLAN page on the main

Re: Who maintains the website ?

2006-07-26 Thread Christophe Devriese
forwarding path, the vlan acceleration, where packets go ...). On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 08:41:58AM +1200, Ian McDonald wrote: > On 7/26/06, Christophe Devriese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/Main_Page website I mean. > > > It's a Wiki

Who maintains the website ?

2006-07-25 Thread Christophe Devriese
The http://linux-net.osdl.org/index.php/Main_Page website I mean. -- -- Christophe Devriese EURiD Network Adminstrator / Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- http