From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [patch net-next] switchdev: call bridge setlink/dellink ndos recursively Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:36:38 +0100 Message-ID: <20150316163638.GI2058@nanopsycho.orion> References: <1426515774-21038-1-git-send-email-jiri@resnulli.us> <5506F4DF.30700@cumulusnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, sfeldma@gmail.com To: roopa Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]:34181 "EHLO mail-wg0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933088AbbCPQgw (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:36:52 -0400 Received: by wggv3 with SMTP id v3so44626641wgg.1 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 09:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5506F4DF.30700@cumulusnetworks.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 04:21:03PM CET, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com wrote: >On 3/16/15, 7:22 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 > >no worries. thanks for submitting the patch Jiri. > >One thing though (Which i also mentioned in one of the threads on this), >the below command will not work with layered devices with the below patch. >Because 'self' commands will directly try to find the switch port driver from >rtnetlink.c and they dont use the switch dev api. > >bridge link set dev bond0 learning off self > > >The code that currently exists in the tree with bond and team supporting the >op >will actually work. Hmm, interesting. DaveM, this might be a good argument for call propagation. What do you think? > >If you agree with the above, I can rethink how this can be made to work with >the 'self' >indirection from rtnetlink.c and still use transparent lowerdev traversal and >resubmit. >Or if you prefer to resubmit, you can. > >Thanks, >Roopa >