From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] fixes to arp_notify for virtual machine migration use case Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 23:08:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100525.230822.71096271.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1273671554.7572.11190.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <20100523.233722.232536798.davem@davemloft.net> <1274779201.24218.7164.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, Jeremy.Fitzhardinge@citrix.com, stable@kernel.org To: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:41687 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932785Ab0EZGIM (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2010 02:08:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1274779201.24218.7164.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Ian Campbell Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 10:20:01 +0100 > Anyway, assuming the fact that arp_notify is disabled by default hasn't > changed your mind, would adding NETDEV_NOTIFY_PEERS triggered by > netif_notify_peers() be appropriate or would it be preferable to simply > add netif_notify_peers() which generates the existing NETDEV_CHANGEADDR? A seperate NETDEV_NOTIFY_PEERS seems the best idea to me. > I don't think there's any need for a new sysctl so I'll gate the new > option on the existing arp_notify one. Yep, sounds good.