[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130730.165557.1185057462473078021.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 16:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc: william.manley@...view.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bcrl@...ck.org,
luky-37@...mail.com, sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com,
bhutchings@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] net: igmp: Allow user-space configuration of
igmp unsolicited report interval
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:14:26 +0200
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 03:21:51PM +0100, William Manley wrote:
>> @@ -2099,6 +2103,10 @@ static struct devinet_sysctl_table {
>> DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY(NOPOLICY, "disable_policy"),
>> DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY(FORCE_IGMP_VERSION,
>> "force_igmp_version"),
>> + DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY(IGMPV2_UNSOLICITED_REPORT_INTERVAL,
>> + "igmpv2_unsolicited_report_interval"),
>> + DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY(IGMPV3_UNSOLICITED_REPORT_INTERVAL,
>> + "igmpv3_unsolicited_report_interval"),
>> DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY(PROMOTE_SECONDARIES,
>> "promote_secondaries"),
>> DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY(ROUTE_LOCALNET,
>
> Why did you use DEVINET_SYSCTL_FLUSHING_ENTRY here? Wouldn't
> DEVINET_SYSCTL_RW_ENTRY be a better choice?
Agreed, there is no reason to flush the routing cache just because
the igmp unsolicited report interval changed.
--
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