From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Dichtel Subject: Re: [patch net-next] vlan: Don't allow vlan devices to change network namespaces. Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:23:27 +0200 Message-ID: <53576A6F.2020207@6wind.com> References: <1398170586-6668-1-git-send-email-chenweilong@huawei.com> <1398176819.29946.49.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <5357280C.1000404@huawei.com> Reply-To: nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: kaber@trash.net, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: chenweilong , Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]:59046 "EHLO mail-wi0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753968AbaDWHXa (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2014 03:23:30 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f182.google.com with SMTP id d1so661487wiv.9 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 00:23:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5357280C.1000404@huawei.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le 23/04/2014 04:40, chenweilong a =C3=A9crit : > On 2014/4/22 22:26, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 20:43 +0800, Chen Weilong wrote: >>> From: Weilong Chen >>> >>> Like bonding, vlan as netdevice doesn't cross netns boundaries. >>> >>> Vlan port and vlan itself live in same netns. >> >> Please explain why you believe it should be like that. >> >> bonding and vlan have quite different purpose, so your changelog is >> quite obscure. >> >> We had a discussion like this one with macvlan, and prior patch was >> rejected. >> >> >> >> > This idea comes from the different result of two changing namespace o= rders. > Test on eth1 and its vlan eth1.5, move them form default ns to a new = ns called net0. > 1.move eth1 first,and then eth1.5; > 2.move eth1.5 first, and then eth1; > As a network manager, I will be happy they both work, I don't care ab= out the orders. > But, 1) doesn't work, if eth1 was moved to other ns, all related vlan= s were unregisted. > you need to create a new eth1.5 in net0. > And, 2) is not safe, if someone forgets to move eth1, eth1.5 will not= work, making > things complex. We have to fix this case, because it is a valid use case to have eth1.5= in net0 and eth1 in another ns. > > So what's the better order ? > I prefer 1), when a vlan dev is setup, it has a namespace, and belong= s to it, > When somebody moves it, it should say 'hey boy, don't move me,I like = here :0' > > Thanks, > Weilong