From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Gross Subject: Re: bnx2 vlan issue Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:55:08 -0700 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: netdev To: Seblu Return-path: Received: from mail-vx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:63110 "EHLO mail-vx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933832Ab1CXTz3 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:55:29 -0400 Received: by vxi39 with SMTP id 39so295373vxi.19 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 12:55:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:58 AM, Seblu wrote: >> I don't necessarily disagree that there should be a better way to do >> this, though as of the moment the above is probably your best bet. >> >> To me, the most important thing is to have consistent behavior acros= s >> different cards. > > Speaking of that, i've tryed =A02.6.38 on my station (dell opitplex 9= 80) > to use the new bridging schema and it doesn't work. > Exactly the case previously described: ip on br0 (eth0+eth1) and ip o= n > br0.42. eth0 driver is e1000e and eth1 is tg3. br0.42 don't receive > traffic. > I have to open a bug report? The change was deliberate, not an accidental mistake, so don't expect 2.6.38 to suddenly switch back to the previous behavior. There's no need to file a bug report - the new behavior is known (I was the one who changed it in the first place). I will look into nicer semantics in the future.