| Message ID | 20230828021223.42149-1-shannon.nelson@amd.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | RFC |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [RFC,net] bonding: add loadbalance case to queue override | expand |
diff --git a/include/net/bonding.h b/include/net/bonding.h index 30ac427cf0c6..e812a84dbc05 100644 --- a/include/net/bonding.h +++ b/include/net/bonding.h @@ -296,6 +296,7 @@ static inline struct bonding *bond_get_bond_by_slave(struct slave *slave) static inline bool bond_should_override_tx_queue(struct bonding *bond) { return BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_ACTIVEBACKUP || + BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_XOR || BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_ROUNDROBIN; }
(RFC - At the risk of possibly kicking over an old dormant bee's nest, as well as displaying my own naivety in matters of bonding ...) Someone asked me why the bond slave override queue selection didn't work in the load balancer mode. After digging into it a little, I found that it was originally added [1] only allowing round-robin and active-backup modes and has not changed since. On initial review, it seems a simple matter to simply add the BOND_MODE_XOR to the bond_should_override_tx_queue() logic, especially since all the potential slaves should be up and active for the XOR anyway. Jay's and Neil's comments about using balance-xor [2],[3] seem to hint this should work. Of course, something "simple" likely has something not so simple hiding in the background. No, I haven't actually tested this, I wanted to first throw out the question to those smarter than me before going any further down a possibly bumpy path. So, what am I missing? Thanks, sln Links: [1]: https://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2010/05/11/6 [2]: https://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2010/05/11/77 [3]: https://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2010/05/12/2 Fixes: bb1d912323d5 ("bonding: allow user-controlled output slave selection") Signed-off-by: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@amd.com> --- include/net/bonding.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)