Commentary for Avodah Zarah 115:1

For a reason not entirely clear, Rava does not want R. Huna b. Nahman to enter into his room. But he enters anyway. R. Huna b. Nahman asks Rava how he rules in a case where the non-Jew shook the wine but did not do so with the intention of libating. Rava, against what he said earlier, claims that it is forbidden for usage. R. Huna responds that Rava himself said that such shaking does not make the wine yayin nesekh. Rava responds that he agrees that the wine that was actually shaken is yayin nesekh. But since the storekeeper threw the wine into a barrel with unshaken wine, he need not lose the value of the entire barrel. He may sell the barrel but just reduce the value of the wine thrown in.
The Tosafot have another reading of this section. They read that it is not R. Huna son of R. Nahman who comes to Mehoza but R. Nahman, Rava’s teacher. This helps explain why Rava is afraid of him—he fears that he is contradicting his teacher. Rava now asks R. Nahman for the ruling, and R. Nahman responds that it is forbidden to even use such wine. Rava then responds by claiming that R. Nahman said that such shaking does not make yayin nesekh. R. Nahman concludes by saying that the value of the wine actually shaken is prohibited.
This is a much easier reading of the Talmud but it is not the text that we have in front of us, which follows Rashi’s reading.