On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 08:25:07 + Hangbin Liu wrote:
> Could you help process it, or should I re-post it?
Repost.
Hi David,
This patch set was marked as "Changes Requested" due to my initial reply.
The series has now been approved by Jay and Nikolay.
Could you help process it, or should I re-post it?
Thanks
Hangbin
On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 09:29:18AM +, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> The mac address on backup sla
On 2/7/25 11:29, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> The mac address on backup slave should be convert from Solicited-Node
> Multicast address, not from bonding unicast target address.
>
> v3: also fix the mac setting for slave_set_ns_maddr. (Jay)
> Add function description for slave_set_ns_maddr/slave_set_n
Hangbin Liu wrote:
>The mac address on backup slave should be convert from Solicited-Node
>Multicast address, not from bonding unicast target address.
>
>v3: also fix the mac setting for slave_set_ns_maddr. (Jay)
>Add function description for slave_set_ns_maddr/slave_set_ns_maddrs (Jay)
>v2:
Hi Jay,
Any comments?
Thanks
Hangbin
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 07:31:32AM +, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> Hi Jay,
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2025 at 06:34:21AM +, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > Please hold on this patch. Our QE reported that with bare NIC, the
> > backup NIC can't receive the NS messages even after
Hi Jay,
On Sat, Feb 08, 2025 at 06:34:21AM +, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> Please hold on this patch. Our QE reported that with bare NIC, the
> backup NIC can't receive the NS messages even after joining the multicast
> MAC group. But after remove the backup NIC from bond, the NIC interface
> could rec
Please hold on this patch. Our QE reported that with bare NIC, the
backup NIC can't receive the NS messages even after joining the multicast
MAC group. But after remove the backup NIC from bond, the NIC interface
could receive the NS message.
This is weird, it looks the backup NIC dropped the NS m
7 matches
Mail list logo
