From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] C/R: Basic support for network namespaces and devices (v3) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:34:48 -0600 Message-ID: <20100210203448.GD23301@us.ibm.com> References: <1265750713-15749-1-git-send-email-danms@us.ibm.com> <1265750713-15749-3-git-send-email-danms@us.ibm.com> <87ljf1gemh.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> <20100210192019.GA18879@us.ibm.com> <87hbpohor5.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> <20100210202509.GA23301@us.ibm.com> <87d40chlyx.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87d40chlyx.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Smith Cc: containers@lists.osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Quoting Dan Smith (danms@us.ibm.com): > SH> I think that's be better. Right now if we checkpoint a container > SH> with macvlan restart will be bogus, right? We're trying to avoid > SH> any cases where we can't tell, at checkpoint, that restart won't > SH> be right. > > Depends on your definition of bogus, and the situation, but okay. > > SH> What I was asking is should do_veth_message() be in drivers/net/veth.c? > > Well, we could add another ndo_* function to the net device, I guess, > but I'd be afraid we'd hit some cases where that wasn't sufficient. > Maybe it would be best to generalize that bit after I've added macvlan > (,etc) support so we have a good idea of what else would be needed? Yeah, I think you're right. thanks, -serge