[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8854.1238027647@death.nxdomain.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 17:34:07 -0700
From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jgarzik@...ox.com, davem@...emloft.net,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
bonding-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, kaber@...sh.net,
mschmidt@...hat.com, dada1@...mosbay.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: allow bond in mode balance-alb to work properly in bridge -try3
Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com> wrote:
>Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 05:31:53PM CET, fubar@...ibm.com wrote:
[...]
>>> #if defined(CONFIG_BRIDGE) || defined (CONFIG_BRIDGE_MODULE)
>>> /* These hooks defined here for ATM */
>>> struct net_bridge;
>>>@@ -2251,10 +2258,12 @@ int netif_receive_skb(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>> null_or_orig = NULL;
>>> orig_dev = skb->dev;
>>> if (orig_dev->master) {
>>>- if (skb_bond_should_drop(skb))
>>>+ if (skb_bond_should_drop(skb)) {
>>> null_or_orig = orig_dev; /* deliver only exact match */
>>>- else
>>>+ } else {
>>> skb->dev = orig_dev->master;
>>>+ bond_change_dest_hook(skb);
>>
>> Since you put the hook outside of the skb_bond_should_drop
>>function, does the VLAN accelerated receive path do the right thing if,
>>e.g., there's a VLAN on top of bonding and that VLAN is part of the
>>bridge?
Jiri: not trying to be pushy, but you didn't address the above
question about the VLAN path, and I just want to make sure that you saw
it (it was at the bottom of a long email, so I fear you may not have
seen it).
-J
---
-Jay Vosburgh, IBM Linux Technology Center, fubar@...ibm.com
--
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