From: Marek Lindner <lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Pau Koning <paukoning@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 1/7] batman-adv: Move soft-interface initialization to ndo_init
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 16:19:17 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201212251619.17912.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANiGF9_4QP0ts2kV9Bruk_8L7h1870LMcrRhtsYu35q=COF0hQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday, December 25, 2012 07:18:37 Pau Koning wrote:
> >> What decision? I only see something about Patch 6 and Patch 7: Antonio
> >> Quartulli doesn't want rtnetlink support in batman-adv. I don't see
> >> any other statement about the rest of the patchset.
> >
> > Quoting Antonio:
> >
> >
> > Anyway, I discussed about this together with the others and it seems
> > that a proper solution now is to wait before merging this patchset and
> > fix the current sysfs/rtnl_lock problem first. What do you think?
> >
> > Adding a new API without fixing the current one doesn't sound like a good
> > move.
> > <<<
> >
> > What isn't clear ?
>
> AFAIK patch 6 and 7 are the "new" rtnetlink API. The rest can be
> categorized as fixes for bugs and for the wrong way to implementation
> things.
After looking at the patches again, I'd say only patch1 & patch2 could be
categorized as "fixes" while the remaining patches are preparation patches for
the netlink stuff which is added in the last step. Whether patch1 & patch2
actually fix problems batman-adv already has today or whether they are
necessary once you use netlink is unclear to me. If they are unrelated to this
patchset they'd be sent separately, wouldn't they ?
Cheers,
Marek
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marek Lindner <lindner_marek-LWAfsSFWpa4@public.gmane.org>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n-ZwoEplunGu2X36UT3dwllkB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Cc: netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Sven Eckelmann <sven-KaDOiPu9UxWEi8DpZVb4nw@public.gmane.org>,
David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>,
Pau Koning <paukoning-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] batman-adv: Move soft-interface initialization to ndo_init
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 16:19:17 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201212251619.17912.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANiGF9_4QP0ts2kV9Bruk_8L7h1870LMcrRhtsYu35q=COF0hQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
On Tuesday, December 25, 2012 07:18:37 Pau Koning wrote:
> >> What decision? I only see something about Patch 6 and Patch 7: Antonio
> >> Quartulli doesn't want rtnetlink support in batman-adv. I don't see
> >> any other statement about the rest of the patchset.
> >
> > Quoting Antonio:
> >
> >
> > Anyway, I discussed about this together with the others and it seems
> > that a proper solution now is to wait before merging this patchset and
> > fix the current sysfs/rtnl_lock problem first. What do you think?
> >
> > Adding a new API without fixing the current one doesn't sound like a good
> > move.
> > <<<
> >
> > What isn't clear ?
>
> AFAIK patch 6 and 7 are the "new" rtnetlink API. The rest can be
> categorized as fixes for bugs and for the wrong way to implementation
> things.
After looking at the patches again, I'd say only patch1 & patch2 could be
categorized as "fixes" while the remaining patches are preparation patches for
the netlink stuff which is added in the last step. Whether patch1 & patch2
actually fix problems batman-adv already has today or whether they are
necessary once you use netlink is unclear to me. If they are unrelated to this
patchset they'd be sent separately, wouldn't they ?
Cheers,
Marek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-25 8:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-24 0:02 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 1/7] batman-adv: Move soft-interface initialization to ndo_init Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 2/7] batman-adv: Move deinitialization of soft-interface to destructor Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 3/7] batman-adv: Don't always delete softif when last slave was removed Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 4/7] batman-adv: Remove slave interfaces before removing master interface Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 5/7] batman-adv: Allow to postpone softif unregistration Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 6/7] batman-adv: Allow to use rntl_link for device creation/deletion Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-12-01 13:11 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Antonio Quartulli
2012-12-01 13:16 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-12-01 13:16 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-12-01 13:28 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Antonio Quartulli
2012-12-01 13:28 ` Antonio Quartulli
2012-12-01 13:39 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-12-01 13:39 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-12-01 14:54 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Antonio Quartulli
2012-12-01 14:54 ` Re: " Antonio Quartulli
2012-11-24 0:02 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 7/7] batman-adv: Allow to modify slaves of soft-interfaces through rntl_link Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 0:02 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 20:59 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH 1/7] batman-adv: Move soft-interface initialization to ndo_init David Miller
2012-11-24 20:59 ` David Miller
2012-11-24 21:23 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Sven Eckelmann
2012-11-24 21:23 ` Sven Eckelmann
2012-12-24 14:22 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Pau Koning
2012-12-24 14:22 ` Pau Koning
2012-12-24 14:37 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Marek Lindner
2012-12-24 14:37 ` Marek Lindner
2012-12-24 15:36 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Pau Koning
2012-12-24 15:36 ` Pau Koning
2012-12-24 19:37 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] " Marek Lindner
2012-12-24 19:37 ` Marek Lindner
2012-12-24 23:18 ` Pau Koning
2012-12-24 23:18 ` Pau Koning
2012-12-25 8:19 ` Marek Lindner [this message]
2012-12-25 8:19 ` Marek Lindner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201212251619.17912.lindner_marek@yahoo.de \
--to=lindner_marek@yahoo.de \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paukoning@gmail.com \
--cc=sven@narfation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.