netdev - Re: bnx2 vlan issue

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTi=zfhwHTB7kitgwk3AzSa0aFFyxgM_ZY-3wObR5@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:55:08 -0700
From:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
To:	Seblu <seblu@...lu.net>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: bnx2 vlan issue

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Seblu <seblu@...lu.net> wrote:
>> I don't necessarily disagree that there should be a better way to do
>> this, though as of the moment the above is probably your best bet.
>>
>> To me, the most important thing is to have consistent behavior across
>> different cards.
>
> Speaking of that, i've tryed  2.6.38 on my station (dell opitplex 980)
> to use the new bridging schema and it doesn't work.
> Exactly the case previously described: ip on br0 (eth0+eth1) and ip on
> br0.42. eth0 driver is e1000e and eth1 is tg3. br0.42 don't receive
> traffic.
> I have to open a bug report?

The change was deliberate, not an accidental mistake, so don't expect
2.6.38 to suddenly switch back to the previous behavior.  There's no
need to file a bug report - the new behavior is known (I was the one
who changed it in the first place).  I will look into nicer semantics
in the future.
--
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