Re: discussion questions: SR-IOV, virtualization, and bonding

On 08/02/2012 04:26 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:

On 08/02/2012 02:30 PM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:

quoted

The best long term solution is to have a user space API that
provides link state input to bonding on a per-slave basis, and then some
user space entity can perform whatever link monitoring method is
appropriate (e.g., LLDP) and pass the results to bonding.

I think this has potential. This requires a virtual communication
channel between guest/host if we want the host to be able to influence
the guest's choice of active link, but I think that's not unreasonable.

Actually, couldn't we do this now? Turn off miimon and arpmon, then just
have the userspace thing write to /sys/class/net/bondX/bonding/active_slave

Hmm...looks like the bonding code requires either miimon or arpmon.  I 
wonder if setting miimon to INT_MAX might work, at least for some 
bonding modes.

Chris

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired