[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] bridge: trigger a bridge calculation upon port changes
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 02:22:43PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 01:46:49PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote: >> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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);. >> >> I still don't see why, in fact trying to verify this I am wondering now >> if instead we should actually fix br_features_recompute() to take into >> consideration BR_ROOT_BLOCK as below. Notice how netdev_update_features() >> is called above even if the MAC address did not change, just as is done >> on br_del_if(). There is an NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE event so would it be more >> appropriate we just call >> >> call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_FEAT_CHANGE, p->br->dev) >> >> for both the above then and also br_del_if()? How about the below >> change? >> >> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_if.c b/net/bridge/br_if.c >> index 54d207d..dcd9378 100644 >> --- a/net/bridge/br_if.c >> +++ b/net/bridge/br_if.c >> @@ -315,6 +315,8 @@ netdev_features_t br_features_recompute(struct >> net_bridge *br, >> features &= ~NETIF_F_ONE_FOR_ALL; >> >> list_for_each_entry(p, &br->port_list, list) { >> + if (p->flags & BR_ROOT_BLOCK) >> + continue; >> features = netdev_increment_features(features, >> p->dev->features, mask); >> } > > Cong, can you provide feedback on this? I tried to grow confidence on the > hunk above but its not clear but the other points still hold and I'd love > your feedback on those. Re-poke. Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |