From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [RFC] bridge: MAC learning uevents Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 16:54:19 -0700 Message-ID: References: <7824e091-6b1a-bf39-0f78-1c9084d59972@herrendoerfer.name> <20160908083920.0d421951@xeon-e3> <9f5db5b9-37dc-91c0-70e2-38644cc5bdb7@gmail.com> <20160908141626.0ae9025a@xeon-e3> <63AE46DA-1F36-426E-A1D4-AF95E7646177@herrendoerfer.name> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "D. Herrendoerfer" , Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:32880 "EHLO mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751014AbcIIXyW (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Sep 2016 19:54:22 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f193.google.com with SMTP id 128so4636987pfb.0 for ; Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:54:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <63AE46DA-1F36-426E-A1D4-AF95E7646177@herrendoerfer.name> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/09/2016 01:51 AM, D. Herrendoerfer wrote: >> just like neighbor table modifications, it should be possible to listen for >> events with netlink. Doing it through uevent is the wrong model. > > I agree partially - but consider: > we plug hardware - we get an event > we remove hardware - we get an event > we add a virtual interface - we get an event > we add a bridge - event > we add an interface to that bridge - event > a kvm guest starts using the interface on that bridge - we need to monitor netlink, poll brforward, capture traffic Yes, because now there is network activity going on, so why not ask the networking stack to get these events? > > It seems inconsistent, bridge is already emitting events. It does not seem particularly inconsistent, all networking events are already emitted using rt netlink, why should bridge be different here? (Yes, uevent is netlink too, just a special family). -- Florian