From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/3] switchdev: support stp updates on stacked netdevices Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 17:56:32 +0100 Message-ID: <20150315165632.GF2043@nanopsycho.orion> References: <1426206598-29410-1-git-send-email-roopa@cumulusnetworks.com> <20150313.001007.65274068513753002.davem@davemloft.net> <5502E544.7030003@cumulusnetworks.com> <20150313.123156.2118585119289960334.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, sfeldma@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]:36147 "EHLO mail-wi0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751188AbbCOQ4h (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:56:37 -0400 Received: by wibg7 with SMTP id g7so21113898wib.1 for ; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 09:56:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150313.123156.2118585119289960334.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 05:31:56PM CET, davem@davemloft.net wrote: >From: roopa >Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 06:25:24 -0700 > >> David, if you mean not touch bond and team but have the switchdev >> api do it transparently, yes, i had it that way initially. And i do >> liked it that way as well. But the feedback i received (during the >> initial introduction of this for setlink/dellink) was to make it >> explicit for each master. > >I think the concern is that we only want to do this for devices >for which it is safe to "traverse" down like this. Yes, that was my point. Also, some layered drivers might want to do some individual magic, propagate on condition, etc. I think it is clearer architecture. And also, you can see right away what is happening. By doing the travelsal directly in switchdev code, that is in the shadow :/ > >But frankly I cannot think of any layered device where we would >not want to do this. > >Let's go back to the simple scheme where we unconditionally traverse >and if we hit a problem case we'll figure out how to deal with it >then, ok?