Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-12-06 Thread Ferenc Wagner
Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100, Wagner Ferenc wrote: > >> On the policy side: some files are not applicable to some types of >> bonds, and return a single linefeed in that case. Except for one >> single case, which returns 'NA\n'. The patch changes

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-12-06 Thread Ferenc Wagner
Jean Delvare [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100, Wagner Ferenc wrote: On the policy side: some files are not applicable to some types of bonds, and return a single linefeed in that case. Except for one single case, which returns 'NA\n'. The patch changes these

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-12-05 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Wagner, On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100, Wagner Ferenc wrote: > On the policy side: some files are not applicable to some types of > bonds, and return a single linefeed in that case. Except for one > single case, which returns 'NA\n'. The patch changes these cases into > emtpy files.

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-12-05 Thread Jean Delvare
Hi Wagner, On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100, Wagner Ferenc wrote: On the policy side: some files are not applicable to some types of bonds, and return a single linefeed in that case. Except for one single case, which returns 'NA\n'. The patch changes these cases into emtpy files. IMHO a

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Wagner Ferenc
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:56:43 +0100 Ferenc Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> - raise patches against the latest Linus tree >>> (ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/snapshots/) >> >> I thought it was better to change to git. Isn't it so? >>

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:56:43 +0100 Ferenc Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - raise patches against the latest Linus tree > > (ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/snapshots/) > > I thought it was better to change to git. Isn't it so? Yes, git is a bit more uptodate than the

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Ferenc Wagner
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100 Wagner Ferenc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Trailing NULs are present in each file under /sys/class/net/*/bonding >> and also in /sys/class/net/bonding_masters. That is, in every file >> provided by

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100 Wagner Ferenc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:57 +0100 Wagner Ferenc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I propose it as a fix for trailing NULs and spaces like eg. > >> > >> $ od -c

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100 Wagner Ferenc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:57 +0100 Wagner Ferenc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I propose it as a fix for trailing NULs and spaces like eg. $ od -c

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Ferenc Wagner
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:29:40 +0100 Wagner Ferenc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trailing NULs are present in each file under /sys/class/net/*/bonding and also in /sys/class/net/bonding_masters. That is, in every file provided by

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:56:43 +0100 Ferenc Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - raise patches against the latest Linus tree (ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/snapshots/) I thought it was better to change to git. Isn't it so? Yes, git is a bit more uptodate than the snapshots. But

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-27 Thread Wagner Ferenc
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:56:43 +0100 Ferenc Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - raise patches against the latest Linus tree (ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/snapshots/) I thought it was better to change to git. Isn't it so? SubmittingPatches

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-26 Thread Wagner Ferenc
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:57 +0100 Wagner Ferenc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I propose it as a fix for trailing NULs and spaces like eg. >> >> $ od -c /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/slaves >> 000 e t h - l e f t e t h

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-26 Thread Wagner Ferenc
Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:57 +0100 Wagner Ferenc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I propose it as a fix for trailing NULs and spaces like eg. $ od -c /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/slaves 000 e t h - l e f t e t h - r i g

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:57 +0100 Wagner Ferenc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Am I totally of the limit with the attached patch against > drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c? I'd like to receive some comments, > as I'm not a kernel developer. Plese alwayts cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] on

bonding sysfs output

2007-11-25 Thread Wagner Ferenc
Hi, Am I totally of the limit with the attached patch against drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c? I'd like to receive some comments, as I'm not a kernel developer. I propose it as a fix for trailing NULs and spaces like eg. $ od -c /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/slaves 000 e t h - l

bonding sysfs output

2007-11-25 Thread Wagner Ferenc
Hi, Am I totally of the limit with the attached patch against drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c? I'd like to receive some comments, as I'm not a kernel developer. I propose it as a fix for trailing NULs and spaces like eg. $ od -c /sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/slaves 000 e t h - l

Re: bonding sysfs output

2007-11-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:12:57 +0100 Wagner Ferenc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Am I totally of the limit with the attached patch against drivers/net/bonding/bond_sysfs.c? I'd like to receive some comments, as I'm not a kernel developer. Plese alwayts cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] on