[ofa-general] [PATCH 2/4] ipoib: fix loss of connectivity after bonding failover on both sides

[Roland Dreier]

 > So I'm finally understanding this patch.  And I finally see that it is
 > adding a 16-byte memcpy to the data path for every packet we send.  Is
 > the overhead of this really negligible?  Can we think of a better way to
 > handle this rare failure (double failover that causes an ARP to be lost)
 > in a way that doesn't penalize the common datapath?

Never mind, I see we do the memcmp now also.  And I remember that I
hated added it originally.

So can anyone think of a way to avoid it in general?  (But it's not a
blocker for this patch)

 - R.