[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0e80ace1-92f0-4b30-b7e2-af81cb9c84c3@lunn.ch>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 22:39:57 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Elliot Ayrey <Elliot.Ayrey@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc: "olteanv@...il.com" <olteanv@...il.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"razor@...ckwall.org" <razor@...ckwall.org>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"roopa@...dia.com" <roopa@...dia.com>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"bridge@...ts.linux.dev" <bridge@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next (resend) 2/4] net: bridge: send notification for
roaming hosts
> I have changed my implementation to use Andrew's suggestion of using a new attribute
> rather than messing with the port. But would this also be more appropriate if the
> notification was only triggered when receiving the event from hardware?
Hardware only accelerates what the Linux network stack already does in
software. You need something which makes sense for a pure software
setup.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists