From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v1 7/7] macvlan: add FDB bridge ops and new
 macvlan mode
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 17:35:00 +0300
Message-ID: <20120410143500.GD19556@redhat.com>
References: <20120409215419.3288.50790.stgit@jf-dev1-dcblab>
 <20120409220053.3288.40867.stgit@jf-dev1-dcblab>
 <20120410080916.GB26540@redhat.com>
 <4F843544.8060209@intel.com>
 <20120410134321.GB18899@redhat.com>
 <4F8442F6.5070707@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: roprabhu@cisco.com, stephen.hemminger@vyatta.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, hadi@cyberus.ca, bhutchings@solarflare.com,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	gregory.v.rose@intel.com, krkumar2@in.ibm.com, sri@us.ibm.com
To: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5013 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754471Ab2DJOe4 (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:34:56 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F8442F6.5070707@intel.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 07:25:58AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> > Hmm okay, but this would mean we should convert
> > MACVLAN_MODE_PASSTHRU_NOPROMISC to something
> > that can combined with all modes. E.g.
> > MACVLAN_MODE_BRIDGE | MACVLAN_MODE_FLAG_XXXXX
> > 
> > and document that it does not promise to flood
> > multicast.
> >
> 
> How about changing MACVLAN_MODE_PASSTHRU_NOPROMISC -> MACVLAN_MODE_NOPORMISC
> for this patch. Then a follow on series can rework bridge
> and VEPA to use it as well.

Right. We probably need a better name if it's going to
affect other things besides promisc though.

> >> If you want
> >> the flood behavior you can create it by adding the addr to all
> >> the devices or just to a subset of them to get the non-flooding
> >> capabilities.
> >>
> >> .John
> > 
> > BTW we seem to try to flood in pass-through too, not sure why.
> > 
> 
> Suppose your looking at macvlan_handle_frame()? It does
> seem unneeded.
> 
> .John