[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHA+R7MRVyjAN7w_qPxSxkrjo939bNEc3Ej+O3yH-oWj4gGJxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 13:46:49 -0700
From: Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] bridge: trigger a bridge calculation upon port changes
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...e.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:26:25AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 8:15 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez
>> <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> wrote:
>> > spin_unlock_bh(&p->br->lock);
>> > + if (changed)
>> > + call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEADDR,
>> > + p->br->dev);
>> > + netdev_update_features(p->br->dev);
>>
>> I think this is supposed to be in netdev event handler of br->dev
>> instead of here.
>
> Do you mean netdev_update_features() ? I mimic'd what was being done on
> br_del_if() given that root blocking is doing something similar. If
> we need to change something for the above then I suppose it means we need
> to change br_del_if() too. Let me know if you see any reason for something
> else.
>
Yeah, for me it looks like it's better to call netdev_update_features()
in the event handler of br->dev, rather than where calling
call_netdevice_notifiers(..., br->dev);.
--
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