Subject: Re: [PATCH] channel bonding: add support for device-indexed parameters

From: Florin Malita <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:16:08 -0400

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:03:53 -0700
"Jason R. Martin" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Personally I think working to get the sysfs support finished in
> bonding and stop relying on module parameters to configure bonds would
> be better, since bonds will truly be independent of each other and be
> able to be added and removed on the fly.  Having worked with a
> previous attempt to set per-bond values through module parameters
> (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=110558187800001&r=1&w=2), it's easy
> to get pretty crazy.

Agreed - that would be a better configuration interface, but I don't see
why we couldn't support module parameter arrays too. Especially since
the changes are minimal and don't break the ABI/ifenslave
compatibility/etc.

IMHO the "primary" semantics are completely broken right now and this
is a possible fix for it.

> For example, you can have more than one
> arp_ip_target, and they really should be per bond as well, so how do
> you divvy those up via module parameters?

Yup, arp_ip_target is one parameter which doesn't lend itself to this
scheme and this is exactly why the patch doesn't try to fix it.

Florin