From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roopa Prabhu Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/5] bridge: per vlan dst_metadata support Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 22:06:35 -0800 Message-ID: <58941DEB.8030507@cumulusnetworks.com> References: <1485932395-58422-1-git-send-email-roopa@cumulusnetworks.com> <20170202.205053.1531692095462887882.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, tgraf@suug.ch, hannes@stressinduktion.org, jbenc@redhat.com, pshelar@ovn.org, dsa@cumulusnetworks.com, hadi@mojatatu.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f173.google.com ([209.85.192.173]:33791 "EHLO mail-pf0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752525AbdBCGHY (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2017 01:07:24 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-f173.google.com with SMTP id y143so3456683pfb.0 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 22:06:38 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170202.205053.1531692095462887882.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2/2/17, 5:50 PM, David Miller wrote: > I see a lot of "complexity of bridging layer" pushback on these > changes, and I understand where that is coming from. > > But really this isn't even, at a high level, really a bridging change. > > What it's doing is making lwtunnel objects more useful. > > Now that we have lightweight tunnels and netdevs, we will constantly > have this struggle trying to figure out how to make lwtunnel objects > apply to the same cases that netdevs currently only work for. > > Because once you run into one of these situations where only netdevs > work, you are screwed and lwtunnels and their scalability benefit > might as well not even exist. > > To be completely honest, in this case it's pretty clear: > > 1) It makes vxlan lwtunnel objects more usable for bridges. > > 2) It does not make lwtunnels more bloated or consume more memory > or cpu in the dataplane fast paths. > > 3) It makes uptake of lwtunnels higher, because they can be used > in more places. > > So I think this change is a win and a move forward. Thanks David