netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [SET 2][PATCH 2/8][bonding] Propagating master's settings to slaves

To: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [SET 2][PATCH 2/8][bonding] Propagating master's settings to slaves
From: Shmulik Hen <shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:15:18 +0300
Cc: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, Laurent DENIEL <laurent.deniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, bonding-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200308112141.h7BLftpS015012@death.ibm.com>
Organization: Intel corp.
References: <200308112141.h7BLftpS015012@death.ibm.com>
Reply-to: shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.4.3
May I remind you all that the original discussion was only about  
stuff that has to do with configuration time. There was no mention of 
any run time code. ifenslave only does three simple things - add a 
slave, remove a slave and set the current active slave, that's all. 

The drive was to try and make ifenslave slimmer regarding those three 
operations only in the way that any setting of the slave will be done 
by the kernel module instead of the configuration application. There 
is no real "brain" there anyway.

We had some experience with creating an configuration application that 
was incredibly smart and was always aware of what was going on in the 
driver and could make all possible decisions before even attempting 
to access the driver so it could fail the operation without  
"bothering" the driver. It's gigantic. It's extremely hard to install 
and configure. It's even harder to maintain. And all it was meant to 
do is configuration. Imagine what would happen if it was also 
supposed to handle run time issues.

I am not aware of anything like moving kernel code into applications. 
Was that something that was discussed in OLS ? Where can I find some 
more info about this trend ?


        Shmulik.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>