From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Bizon Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] net: allow vlan traffic to be received under bond Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:04:34 +0200 Message-ID: <1318518274.9266.94.camel@sakura.staff.proxad.net> References: <20111010191641.2496.84845.stgit@jf-dev1-dcblab> <20111010223752.GB2373@minipsycho> Reply-To: mbizon@freebox.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ANSI_X3.4-1968" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: John Fastabend , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jesse@nicira.com, fubar@us.ibm.com To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from bobafett.staff.proxad.net ([213.228.1.121]:34834 "EHLO bobafett.staff.proxad.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752448Ab1JMPNR (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:13:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20111010223752.GB2373@minipsycho> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 00:37 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Hmm, I must look at this again tomorrow but I have strong feeling this > will break some some scenario including vlan-bridge-macvlan. unless I'm mistaken, today's behaviour: # vconfig add eth0 100 # brctl addbr br0 # brctl addif br0 eth0 => eth0.100 gets no more packets, br0.100 is to be used after the patch won't we get the opposite ? -- Maxime