From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] macvlan: allow in-kernel modules to create and manage macvlan devices Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:14:42 +0100 Message-ID: <200911272314.42641.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20091113195201.11184.25766.stgit@mimic.site> <20091113195529.11184.19011.stgit@mimic.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kaber@trash.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, alacrityvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Patrick Mullaney Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.186]:50250 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751749AbZK0WOj (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:14:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091113195529.11184.19011.stgit@mimic.site> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Friday 13 November 2009, Patrick Mullaney wrote: > > The macvlan driver didn't allow for creation/deletion of devices > by other in-kernel modules. This patch provides common routines > for both in-kernel and netlink based management. This patch > also enables macvlan device support for gro for lower level > devices that support gro. I wonder if doing this way round is a good idea, why don't you just use netlink to set up the endpoint device like the current macvlan and macvtap do? I think doing it consistently for all backends would be a significant advantage. Arnd <><