[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090305.005646.115456407.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:56:46 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: kaber@...sh.net
Cc: blaschka@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, bart@...ie.net,
greearb@...delatech.com, shemminger@...tta.com,
dada1@...mosbay.com, frank.blaschka@...ibm.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] 2.6.29-rc* QinQ vlan trunking regression
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 09:27:12 +0100
> Frank Blaschka wrote:
> > Hi Dave, Patrick,
> >
> > sorry I could not follow the complete discussion of the fixes done for this problem
> > but does
> >
> > if (netif_device_present(real_dev) && ops->ndo_neigh_setup)
> > - err = ops->ndo_neigh_setup(dev, pa);
> > + err = ops->ndo_neigh_setup(real_dev, pa);
> >
> > not change the idea of the neigh_setup? Remind we want the neigh_setup of the
> > real device as the neigh setup function for the vlan device.
> >
>
> An we still use it. The only difference is that we pass it the
> correct device reference, which not only fixes the recursion,
> but is also expected by the callbacks. Look at bonding or simply
> vlan itself.
>
> The setup itself is still done using the neigh_params passed to
> VLAN, which appears to be what was originally intended.
Then bond_neigh_setup() has the same bug, doesn't it?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists