[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150317070539.GE2042@nanopsycho.orion>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 08:05:39 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, sfeldma@...il.com,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next] switchdev: call bridge setlink/dellink ndos
recursively
Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:08:32PM CET, john.fastabend@...il.com wrote:
>On 03/16/2015 07:22 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>There has been a discussion about if it's better to let masters to
>>propagate call down themself or if its better just blindly go down and
>>try to call ndo on every lower netdev. Turned out that more people (me
>>not included) like the second option better.
>>
>>This patch changes bridge setlink/dellink in that direction.
>>Sorry Roopa for forcing you to do it the way I liked initially.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>
>Hi Jiri,
>
>I'm going to ask the dumb question here because it wasn't clear from
>the emails I could dredge up.
>
>Why do you want to do this? Can you add it to the commit message so
I don't want to do this. It just look like there has been a consensus
that most of the people want this.
>in the future it is clear. Specifically what does it mean to propagate
>these calls down? Can you give a stacked example?
Example of propagation of ndo call through stacked devices:
dev->ops->ndo_bridge_setlink (team_ndo_bridge_setlink)
-> for_each_team_port(port_dev)
-> port_dev->ops->ndo_bridge_setlink(rocker_ndo_bridge_setlink)
>
>Thanks,
>John
>
>--
>John Fastabend Intel Corporation
--
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