[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <548EFD94.8070905@mojatatu.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 10:26:12 -0500
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
CC: sfeldma@...il.com, bcrl@...ck.org, tgraf@...g.ch,
john.fastabend@...il.com, stephen@...workplumber.org,
linville@...driver.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
shm@...ulusnetworks.com, gospo@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/4] swdevice: add new api to set and del
bridge port attributes
Sorry - i didnt quiet follow the discussion, but i can see the value
of propagating things from parent to children netdevs as part of the
generic approach. And in that spirit:
Ben's patches (and I am sure the cumulus folk do this) expose ports.
i.e you boot up the hardware and you see ports. You can then put these
ports in a bridge and you can offload fdbs and do other parametrization
to the ASIC. IOW, this only becomes a bridge because you created one
in the kernel and attached bridge ports to it.
Lets say i didnt want a bridge. I want instead to take these exposed
ports and create a bond (and maybe play with LACP). How does this
propagation from parent->child->child work then? I think the idea
of just bonding and not exposing it as a switch is a reasonable use
case.
Also how does it work when i start doing L3 and the bond's port doesnt
support L3? Is it time to revive the thing we called TheThing in Du?
cheers,
jamal
On 12/14/14 14:41, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
> On 12/14/14, 7:35 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
[..chopped off for brevity and saving electrons..]
cheers,
jamal
--
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