On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 13:30:12 -0800
Alexander Duyck <alexander.du...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Again, I undertand your motivation. Yet I don't like your solution.
> > But if the decision is made to do this in-driver bonding. I would like
> > to see it baing done some generic way:
> > 1) share the same "in-driver bonding core" code with netvsc
> > put to net/core.
> > 2) the "in-driver bonding core" will strictly limit the functionality,
> > like active-backup mode only, one vf, one backup, vf netdev type
> > check (so noone could enslave a tap or anything else)
> > If user would need something more, he should employ team/bond.
Sharing would be good, but netvsc world would really like to only have
one visible network device.