On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 05:32:03PM -0700, Brown, Aaron F wrote:
> >Why not just put them in /sys/class/bond/ instead?
>
> Bonding creates a virtual network device, it seems to logically fit down
> in /sys/class/net much better then at a level all to itself.
Ok, fair enough, it's up to you all where you want to put it, I was just
offering a suggestion.
> >> The problem, then, becomes one of separating the bond interfaces from
> the
> >> non-bond interfaces.
> >
> >See proposal above.
> >
> >> The bonding_masters file is a simple solution to
> >> this problem. Reading the file gives the set of active bonds, and
> >writing
> >> the file changes the set of active bonds. As I stated before, a
> cursory
> >> reading of Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.txt indicates that such a
> >usage
> >> is "socially acceptable". (Or at least it was to Patrick Mochel back
> in
> >> January of 2003.)
> >
> >Pat was just trying to be nice. I'm not. :)
> >
> >Also, if you have too many bonds, your code will fail.
>
> This is true, but an unlikely event in any real system I am aware of.
> If I use the max_bonds load parameter and create say 600 bonds (which
> will be named bond0, bond1... bond599) then cat out the bonding_masters
> file I only see 524 bonds (bond0...bond523.)
Yup, don't want to have that happen. So I'm glad you agree with me :)
> However, as a bond interface requires at least one but usually more
> physical network devices to be of much benefit I see it unlikely that
> anybody will really ever have a real need for that many bonds. Since
> bonding really is used for combining 2 or more adapters into a single
> logical channel it could handle 1048 ports set up in bonds of 2 before
> this type of failure would appear.
Can you guarantee that no one wants that many bonds? I can't, and I
don't think you want to redo your userinterface some time in the future
when people ask for this. My proposal has no such limitations.
thanks,
greg k-h
|