Hi, Eduard
Please put the cables back after change the mode to round robin,
and then ping the remote PC
bill
Please put the cables back after change the mode to round robin,
and then ping the remote PC
The scenario is:
1 Create a bond with 3 interfaces (connect them to switch).
2 Change bond's mode to active/backup.
3 Physicly remove two cables form interfaces ( not the active interface ).
4 Change the mode to round robin.
5 Put the cables back
6 Try to ping some other computer.
bill
At 2011-07-31 23:15:22,"Eduard Sinelnikov" <eduard.sinelnikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Hi, > >The scenario is: >* Create a bond with 3 interfaces (connect them to switch). >* Change bond's mode to active/backup. >* Physicly remove two cables form interfaces ( not the active interface ). >* Put the cables back >* Change the mode to round robin. >* Try to ping some other computer. > >Now only one interface is pinging to remote computer. >Without removing the cables all three interface will ping to remote >computer periodicly. > > >I did some debuging,in the code, and I see that in round robin all the >interface is in active (and all of them transmiting periodically). >After removing and puting back the cables(in active/backup mode). the >interfaces change their status to backup. >After this only one interface is transmiting ( the one which was the active). > >Thanks in advance, > Eduard > >2011/7/31 Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx>: >> Hi Eduard, >> >> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Eduard Sinelnikov >> <eduard.sinelnikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> In the kernel 2.6.39.3 ( /drivers/net/bond/bond_main.c). >> >> I followed the code you mentioned. The file is actually at: >> >> ./drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c >> >>> In the function ‘bond_xmit_roundrobin’ >>> The code check if the bond is active via >>> ‘bond_is_active_slave(slave)’ Function call. >>> Which actually checks if the slave is backup or active >>> What is the meaning of slave being backup in round robin mode? >>> Correct me if I wrong but in round robin every slave should send a >>> packet, regardless of being active or backup. >> >> I'm not sure about this but my best guess is that even using all >> slaves to send packages, the slaves must be used one at a time, to >> send packages sequentially. And one slave can be deactivated when a >> problem is detected. I think that this two scenarios that justify the >> check. >> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Eduard >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Kernelnewbies mailing list >>> Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies >>> >> >> Peter >> >> -- >> Peter Senna Tschudin >> peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx >> gpg id: 48274C36 >> > >_______________________________________________ >Kernelnewbies mailing list >Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
