[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4694D741.80906@trash.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:12:33 +0200
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>,
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>, devel@...nvz.org,
Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Virtual ethernet device (v2.1)
Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>>Mhh doing it later means dealing with compatibility issues, which
>>is why I'm asking now. We currently support IFLA_NAME, IFLA_MTU,
>
>
> Oh, I see.
>
>
>>IFLA_TXQLEN, IFLA_WEIGTH, IFLA_OPERSTATE and IFLA_LINKMODE, and
>>with my patch additionally IFLA_ADDRESS and IFLA_BROADCAST.
>>AFAICT they are all applicable for the partner link as well.
>
>
> Agree. Maybe it is better to make some generic routine to create the
> device with the parameters specified in the netlink packet. Then the
> generic code creates one end of a tunnel and calls ->new_link callback.
> This callback extracts the PARTNER packet part and calls this generic
> routine to create the second pair.
Something like that. Moving the part between NLM_F_CREATE and the
ops->newlink call of rtnl_newlink to a new function should work.
For now you could even parse the IFLA_PARTNER attribute and nested
IFLA_NAME/IFLA_ADDRESS attributes yourself and ignore the rest,
this will at least leave us the option of handling it generically
later.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists