From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4D748CC3.8060603@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:44:03 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?Tmljb2xhcyBkZSBQZXNsb8O8YW4=?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1649722795.14144.1299480074110.JavaMail.root@tahiti.vyatta.com> In-Reply-To: <1649722795.14144.1299480074110.JavaMail.root@tahiti.vyatta.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH 1/2] Issue NETDEV_CHANGE notification when bridge changes state List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Jay Vosburgh , "Pekka Savola (ipv6)" , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, James Morris , Alexey Kuznetsov , "David S. Miller" , Adam Majer Le 07/03/2011 07:41, Stephen Hemminger a écrit : > >> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:45:41AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>> Since this a generic problem, it needs a better solution. >>> Sending NETDEV_CHANGE impacts lots of other pieces, and even >>> user space has similar problems. >> >> It does seem a little broad notification type. I've checked over >> all the currently defined NETDEV notifiers, and it seems that >> NETDEV_NOTIFY_PEERS may be a better option to use when bridge >> has a potential topology change. >> >> Currently it is only used in ipv4/devinet.c: where it is used to issue >> a gratuitous ARP. > > I was thinking of fixing bridge to not actually bring the link > up until in forwarding mode. Other applications (DHCP, etc) > see the link up and really don't like being in half duplex > during that period. I think it is the right way to manage this situation. And bonding should behave the same, if not already true. Nicolas. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?Tmljb2xhcyBkZSBQZXNsb8O8YW4=?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Issue NETDEV_CHANGE notification when bridge changes state Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 08:44:03 +0100 Message-ID: <4D748CC3.8060603@gmail.com> References: <1649722795.14144.1299480074110.JavaMail.root@tahiti.vyatta.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Adam Majer , "David S. Miller" , Alexey Kuznetsov , "Pekka Savola (ipv6)" , James Morris , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Patrick McHardy , bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andy Gospodarek , Jay Vosburgh To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:42923 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751160Ab1CGHoG (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2011 02:44:06 -0500 Received: by wwb22 with SMTP id 22so4871826wwb.1 for ; Sun, 06 Mar 2011 23:44:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1649722795.14144.1299480074110.JavaMail.root@tahiti.vyatta.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le 07/03/2011 07:41, Stephen Hemminger a =C3=A9crit : > >> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 09:45:41AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >>> Since this a generic problem, it needs a better solution. >>> Sending NETDEV_CHANGE impacts lots of other pieces, and even >>> user space has similar problems. >> >> It does seem a little broad notification type. I've checked over >> all the currently defined NETDEV notifiers, and it seems that >> NETDEV_NOTIFY_PEERS may be a better option to use when bridge >> has a potential topology change. >> >> Currently it is only used in ipv4/devinet.c: where it is used to iss= ue >> a gratuitous ARP. > > I was thinking of fixing bridge to not actually bring the link > up until in forwarding mode. Other applications (DHCP, etc) > see the link up and really don't like being in half duplex > during that period. I think it is the right way to manage this situation. And bonding shoul= d behave the same, if not=20 already true. Nicolas.