[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090508162949.4e76abd6@nehalam>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 16:29:49 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: jpirko@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, jgarzik@...ox.com,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
fubar@...ibm.com, bonding-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
kaber@...sh.net, mschmidt@...hat.com, dada1@...mosbay.com,
ivecera@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: introduce a list of device addresses dev_addr_list
(v6)
On Fri, 08 May 2009 16:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
> Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 16:12:04 -0700
>
> > But the other infrastructure may have same issues (netfilter, etc).
> > Just seems like it would be either to have multiple network devices
> > so that upper layers could disambiguate easier.
>
> That's quite a heavyweight solution to what is purely
> an addressing issue, don't you think?
>
> We can just revert all of that netdev_ops stuff if you
> think per-netdev cost doesn't matter :-)
I am just concerned that is a fundamental change (like MQ) was and
it will take a couple of releases to shake out all the inter-relationships.
When an architectural change is made, would like to see more analysis done.
Netdev-ops was more of a refactoring than a change to what protocols
and qdisc/filters/... see.
--
--
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