From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] bridge: Automatically manage port promiscuous mode. Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:58:26 -0800 Message-ID: <20140226085826.6d9567df@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <1393427905-6811-1-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> <1393427905-6811-5-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mst@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, john.r.fastabend@intel.com, shemminger@vyatta.com To: Vlad Yasevich Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1393427905-6811-5-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: bridge-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: bridge-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 10:18:22 -0500 Vlad Yasevich wrote: > When there is only 1 flooding port, this port is programmed > with all the address the bridge accumulated. This allows > us to place this port into non-promiscuous mode. > At other times, all ports are set as promiscuous. To help > track whether the bridge set the mode or not, a new > flag is introduced. > > Signed-off-by: Vlad Yasevich This mixes the definition of outbound (flooding) and inbound (promiscuous). Not sure if this is safe in all cases.