-
Veaceslav Falico authored
As Jiri noted, currently we first do all bonding-specific initialization (specifically - bond_select_active_slave(bond)) before we actually attach the slave (so that it becomes visible through bond_for_each_slave() and friends). This might result in bond_select_active_slave() not seeing the first/new slave and, thus, not actually selecting an active slave. Fix this by moving all the bond-related init part after we've actually completely initialized and linked (via bond_master_upper_dev_link()) the new slave. Also, remove the bond_(de/a)ttach_slave(), it's useless to have functions to ++/-- one int. After this we have all the initialization of the new slave *before* linking, and all the stuff that needs to be done on bonding *after* it. It has also a bonus effect - we can remove the locking on the new slave init completely, and only use it for bond_select_active_slave(). Reported-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> CC: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> CC: Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net> Signed-off-by: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com> Acked-by: Ding Tianhong@huawei.com Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
5378c2e6