Re: Problem with 2.4.24 e1000 and keepalived

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 1:45am +0100 1/9/04, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> It's unfortunate that the two conditions are conflated by most net drivers.

IMHO, saying "most net drivers" is unfair : tg3, tulip, 3c59x, starfire,
realtek, sis900, dl2k, pcnet32, and IIRC sunhme are OK. eepro100 is nearly
OK but has this annoying bug, and only older 10 Mbps drivers don't report
their status, often because the chip itself doesn't know.

I'm sure you're right; I should have said most of the drivers that I'm using (including e100 &e1000).


My impression, though, is that there's a trend to use netif_carrier_ok() to check the link in newish drivers (of course, it's author-choice, not universal), and that the netif_carrier_ok() is generally implemented to be dependent on the interface being (logically) up.

It'd be nice if we could define link state reporting to be independent of logical up/down state, at least for drivers & devices capable of making the distinction.
--
/Jonathan Lundell.
-
: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux 802.1Q VLAN]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Git]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News and Information]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux PCI]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux