From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4BA84C44.4030707@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:06:12 +0800 From: Cong Wang MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4BA82186.3010204@redhat.com> <1269318470.3552.54.camel@calx> <4BA84607.7030304@redhat.com> <20100322.215703.77339158.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20100322.215703.77339158.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bridge] [RFC Patch 2/3] bridge: make bridge support netpoll List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Miller Cc: fubar@us.ibm.com, nhorman@tuxdriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, mpm@selenic.com, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com, bonding-devel@lists.sourceforge.net David Miller wrote: > From: Cong Wang > Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:39:35 +0800 > >> How could you let the bridge know netpoll is not sent to >> the one that doesn't support netpoll during setup? This will >> be complex, I am afraid. > > Why does this matter at all? Because currently we check netpoll support by ->ndo_poll_controller, for example, tap driver doesn't have ->ndo_poll_controller now, if I choose the target "@192.168.0.2/br0" where "192.168.0.2" is owned by "tap0" which is managed by "br0", netconsole may not work. > > I told you in another mail that we should do away with > these callbacks and all the crazy 'npinfo' assignments > and just do it in the generic code. I think ->ndo_poll_controller is not in the case that you talked about. Thanks.