[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1398412451.3920.3.camel@ubuntu-vm-makita>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 16:54:11 +0900
From: Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
bridge <bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"C. R. Oldham" <cr@...tstack.com>, Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bridge: Handle IFLA_ADDRESS correctly when creating
bridge device
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 11:38 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 21:16:27 +0900
> Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>
> > +static int br_dev_newlink(struct net *src_net, struct net_device *dev,
> > + struct nlattr *tb[], struct nlattr *data[])
> > +{
> > + int err;
> > + struct net_bridge *br = netdev_priv(dev);
> > +
> > + if (tb[IFLA_ADDRESS]) {
> > + spin_lock_bh(&br->lock);
> > + br_stp_change_bridge_id(br, nla_data(tb[IFLA_ADDRESS]));
> > + spin_unlock_bh(&br->lock);
> > + }
> > +
> > + err = register_netdevice(dev);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> Looks good.
>
> Why not just do simpler tail call??
> return register_netdevice(dev);
Yes, It's simpler.
I mimicked team_newlink()'s style, so we can also make it simpler
later :)
I'll send v2.
Thanks,
Toshiaki Makita
--
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