Re: [PATCH net 2/3] bonding:check mode when modify primary_reselect

Nicolas de Pesloüan 	[off-list ref] wrote:

Le 11/06/2012 11:00, Weiping Pan a écrit :

quoted

Using a primary_reselect only makes sense in active backup, TLB or ALB modes.

Signed-off-by: Weiping Pan<redacted>
---
  drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c |    7 +++++++
  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c
index 485bedb..1b0f3cd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c

@@ -1123,6 +1123,13 @@ static ssize_t bonding_store_primary_reselect(struct device *d,
  	if (!rtnl_trylock())
  		return restart_syscall();

+	if (!USES_PRIMARY(bond->params.mode)) {
+		pr_err("%s: Unable to set primary_reselect; %s is in mode %d\n",
+			bond->dev->name, bond->dev->name, bond->params.mode);
+		ret = -EINVAL;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
  	new_value = bond_parse_parm(buf, pri_reselect_tbl);
  	if (new_value<  0)  {
  		pr_err("%s: Ignoring invalid primary_reselect value %.*s.\n",

May I suggest we only issue a warning, store the new value for
primary_reselect, and avoid calling bond_select_active_slave(bond), if
!USE_PRIMARY(bond->params.mode)?

That way, we do not add one more constraint on the order one must write into sysfs.

	I'm not in favor of changing anything here.  There's already a
message that primary_reselect is being changed, I think that's
sufficient.  The other similar cases don't issue warnings, e.g., setting
xmit_hash_policy doesn't complain if the mode is not one that utilizes
the hash.

	-J

---
	-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@us.ibm.com