netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/10] [bonding 2.6] fix monitoring functi

To: "Jeff Garzik" <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [PATCH 2/10] [bonding 2.6] fix monitoring functions
From: Amir Noam <amir.noam@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 10:56:07 +0200
Cc: <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, <bonding-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <E6F7D288B394A64585E67497E5126BA601F99143@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <E6F7D288B394A64585E67497E5126BA601F99143@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.4.3
On Wednesday 29 October 2003 10:01 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> applied to 2.6.  does this need to go into 2.4, too?

As Jay has pointed out this is already in 2.4.

However, the following patch that restores backward compatibility with
old ifenslave is still needed for 2.6. I see that it's already been
applied by David Miller to 2.4.

Amir

diff -Naurp a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c   Thu Oct 30 10:38:34 2003
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c   Thu Oct 30 10:45:02 2003
@@ -3047,6 +3047,10 @@ static int bond_ioctl(struct net_device 
                case SIOCBONDRELEASE:   
                        ret = bond_release(master_dev, slave_dev); 
                        break;
+               case BOND_SETHWADDR_OLD:
+               case SIOCBONDSETHWADDR:
+                       res = bond_sethwaddr(bond_dev, slave_dev);
+                       break;
                case BOND_CHANGE_ACTIVE_OLD:
                case SIOCBONDCHANGEACTIVE:
                        if (USES_PRIMARY(bond_mode)) {


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