[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100322.204939.146100390.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: amwang@...hat.com
Cc: mpm@...enic.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
gospo@...hat.com, nhorman@...driver.com,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
bonding-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, fubar@...ibm.com,
jmoyer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 1/3] netpoll: add generic support for bridge and
bonding devices
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:13:43 +0800
> Matt Mackall wrote:
>> Seems like a lot of interface for something to be used by only a
>> couple
>> core drivers. Hopefully Dave has an opinion here.
>>
>
> Yeah, I worry about this too, maybe we can group those methods
> for netpoll together into another struct, and just put a pointer
> here?
This looks like it's tackled at the wrong layer, to be honest.
Teaching all of these layers about eachother's states is
going to end up being a nightmare in the end.
All of this "where is the npinfo" business can be handled
generically in net/core/dev.c I think, with none of these
callbacks.
For example, something like "if dev lacks ->npinfo, check
it's master".
Another thing, I wouldn't iterate over all devices, like I
see in the bonding poll controller method. Just whichever
one supports netpoll you see first, use it and exit
immediately. Don't send it to every single port, I can't
see how that might be desirable or useful.
--
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