Re: [Patch net-next-2.6] netpoll: disable netpoll when enslave adevice

[Cong Wang]

ä 2011å05æ18æ 18:56, Neil Horman åé:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 06:00:35PM +0800, Amerigo Wang wrote:
...
> > -			case NETDEV_GOING_DOWN:
> >   			case NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE:
> > +			case NETDEV_ENSLAVE:
> >   				nt->enabled = 0;
> >   				stopped = true;
> >   				break;
> This wasn't introduced by this patch, but looking at it made me realize that
> nt->enabled, if it passes through this code path, doesn't properly track weather
> or not netpoll_setup has been called on this interface.  If you look at
> drop_netconsole_target, you'll see we only call netpoll_cleanup_target if
> nt->enabled is set.  We should probably change the nt->enabled check there, and
> in store_enabled to be if (nt->np.dev), like we do in the NETDEV_UNREGISTER case
> in netconsole_netdev_event.

Yeah, also note that we can change ->enabled via configfs too.
I guess we probably need to fix this in another patch...


> > +#define NETDEV_ENSLAVE		0x0014
> Nit:
> Shouldn't this be NETDEV_BONDING_ENSLAVE, to keep it in line with
> NETDEV_BONDING_DESLAVE above?

Actually that is my first thought, but I plan to use this in bridge
case too, because using netconsole on a device underlying a bridge
makes little sense too. Thus, I prefer NETDEV_ENSLAVE to
NETDEV_BONDING_ENSLAVE.

> >   #define SYS_DOWN	0x0001	/* Notify of system down */
> >   #define SYS_RESTART	SYS_DOWN
>
>
> Other than those two points, this looks good to me

Thanks for review.
--
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/