From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com,
mlxsw@mellanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 03/19] ipv6: Clear nexthop flags upon netdev up
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 22:53:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180103205321.GA13248@splinter> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f692a886-82eb-6dc1-a8b9-d1c68466f29c@gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 11:47:16AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 1/3/18 10:40 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> > David, can we please get back to the issue at hand? What's the problem
> > with the location of the call to rt6_sync_up()?
>
> My original comment was asking why do it on NETDEV_CHANGE when it should
> only be needed on NETDEV_UP.
I can condition the call to rt6_sync_up() on the event being NETDEV_UP,
but the location needs to stay the same. Before that the interface still
doesn't have an IP address.
Reason for this requirement is that rt6_sync_up() is going to generate
FIB_EVENT_NH_ADD events that instruct switch drivers to populate their
adjacency tables with the notified nexthop. For this to happen, the
nexthop device needs to have L3 configuration (e.g., RIF in mlxsw) which
is dependent on the presence of an IP address.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-03 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-31 16:14 [RFC PATCH net-next 00/19] ipv6: Align nexthop behaviour with IPv4 Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 01/19] ipv6: Remove redundant route flushing during namespace dismantle Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 02/19] ipv6: Mark dead nexthops with appropriate flags Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 03/19] ipv6: Clear nexthop flags upon netdev up Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 16:20 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:44 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 15:32 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 16:43 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 16:56 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 17:40 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 18:47 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 20:53 ` Ido Schimmel [this message]
2018-01-03 23:08 ` David Ahern
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 04/19] ipv6: Prepare to handle multiple netdev events Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 16:29 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:46 ` Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 05/19] ipv6: Set nexthop flags upon carrier change Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 06/19] ipv6: Set nexthop flags during route creation Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 07/19] ipv6: Check nexthop flags during route lookup instead of carrier Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 08/19] ipv6: Check nexthop flags in route dump " Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 09/19] ipv6: Ignore dead routes during lookup Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 10/19] ipv6: Report dead flag during route dump Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 11/19] ipv6: Add explicit flush indication to routes Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 12/19] ipv6: Teach tree walker to skip multipath routes Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 13/19] ipv6: Flush all sibling routes upon NETDEV_UNREGISTER Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 17:42 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:50 ` Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 14/19] ipv6: Export sernum update function Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 15/19] ipv6: Take table lock outside of " Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 16/19] ipv6: Flush multipath routes when all siblings are dead Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 17:38 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:54 ` Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 17/19] selftests: fib_tests: Add test cases for IPv4/IPv6 FIB Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 18/19] selftests: fib_tests: Add test cases for netdev down Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 19/19] selftests: fib_tests: Add test cases for netdev carrier change Ido Schimmel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180103205321.GA13248@splinter \
--to=idosch@idosch.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=idosch@mellanox.com \
--cc=mlxsw@mellanox.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
--cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).