> On 10 Jun 2019, at 03:14, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
>
> On 09/06/19(Sun) 18:41, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
>> Martin, good day.
>>
>> Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 11:35:48AM -0300, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
>>> On 07/06/19(Fri) 20:55, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
With the hints from Martin Pieuchot had
Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 02:14:57PM -0300, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> In that case I'd like to commit the tweaked version of your diff
> below. Are you ok with it?
Yes. Though, I'd split out the following chunk
> Index: net/if_bridge.c
>
On 09/06/19(Sun) 18:41, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> Martin, good day.
>
> Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 11:35:48AM -0300, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > On 07/06/19(Fri) 20:55, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> > > With the hints from Martin Pieuchot had found out that the current
> > > handling of IFT_ETHER for
On 2019/06/09 11:35, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 07/06/19(Fri) 20:55, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> > Good day.
> >
> > With the hints from Martin Pieuchot had found out that the current
> > handling of IFT_ETHER for bridge(4) /and nowadays, after de-introduction
> > of IFT_MPLSTUNNEL/mpw(4) type
Martin, good day.
Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 11:35:48AM -0300, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 07/06/19(Fri) 20:55, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> > With the hints from Martin Pieuchot had found out that the current
> > handling of IFT_ETHER for bridge(4) /and nowadays, after de-introduction
> > of
On 07/06/19(Fri) 20:55, Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
> Good day.
>
> With the hints from Martin Pieuchot had found out that the current
> handling of IFT_ETHER for bridge(4) /and nowadays, after de-introduction
> of IFT_MPLSTUNNEL/mpw(4) type interfaces, only IFT_ETHER ones can
> be attached to the
Good day.
With the hints from Martin Pieuchot had found out that the current
handling of IFT_ETHER for bridge(4) /and nowadays, after de-introduction
of IFT_MPLSTUNNEL/mpw(4) type interfaces, only IFT_ETHER ones can
be attached to the bridge(4)/
- isn't uniform across both ADD ioctls,
- has
