Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if
On 03/16/2016 02:34 PM, Xin Long wrote: > Now when we change the attributes of bridge or br_port by netlink, > a relevant netlink notification will be sent, but if we change them > by ioctl or sysfs, no notification will be sent. > > We should ensure that whenever those attributes change internally or from > sysfs/ioctl, that a netlink notification is sent out to listeners. > > Also, NetworkManager will use this in the future to listen for out-of-band > bridge master attribute updates and incorporate them into the runtime > configuration. > > This patch is used for br_sysfs_if, and we also move br_ifinfo_notify out > of store_flag. > > Signed-off-by: Xin Long> --- > net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > Generally looks good, but it creates an inconsistency between bridge fdb_flush and port fdb_flush since the latter will generate a notification while the bridge flush will not.
Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if
On 03/16/2016 03:45 PM, Xin Long wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov >wrote: >> On 03/16/2016 02:34 PM, Xin Long wrote: >>> Now when we change the attributes of bridge or br_port by netlink, >>> a relevant netlink notification will be sent, but if we change them >>> by ioctl or sysfs, no notification will be sent. >>> >>> We should ensure that whenever those attributes change internally or from >>> sysfs/ioctl, that a netlink notification is sent out to listeners. >>> >>> Also, NetworkManager will use this in the future to listen for out-of-band >>> bridge master attribute updates and incorporate them into the runtime >>> configuration. >>> >>> This patch is used for br_sysfs_if, and we also move br_ifinfo_notify out >>> of store_flag. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Xin Long >>> --- >>> net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c | 5 +++-- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >> >> Generally looks good, but it creates an inconsistency between bridge >> fdb_flush >> and port fdb_flush since the latter will generate a notification while the >> bridge flush will not. >> > yeah, because port fdb_flush is called by brport_store(), in the > common function. Right. > do you think it''s redundant if we add a notification in bridge > fdb_flush to keep > consistence with port fdb_flush? > Hmm, technically we're doing this via a sysfs option and the netlink fdb flush one will generate a notification, so I'd say let's make them all consistent and make them all generate a notification, and also making the bridge fdb_flush use the bridge_store_parm should be trivial. Thanks, Nik
Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrovwrote: > On 03/16/2016 02:34 PM, Xin Long wrote: >> Now when we change the attributes of bridge or br_port by netlink, >> a relevant netlink notification will be sent, but if we change them >> by ioctl or sysfs, no notification will be sent. >> >> We should ensure that whenever those attributes change internally or from >> sysfs/ioctl, that a netlink notification is sent out to listeners. >> >> Also, NetworkManager will use this in the future to listen for out-of-band >> bridge master attribute updates and incorporate them into the runtime >> configuration. >> >> This patch is used for br_sysfs_if, and we also move br_ifinfo_notify out >> of store_flag. >> >> Signed-off-by: Xin Long >> --- >> net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> > > Generally looks good, but it creates an inconsistency between bridge fdb_flush > and port fdb_flush since the latter will generate a notification while the > bridge flush will not. > yeah, because port fdb_flush is called by brport_store(), in the common function. do you think it''s redundant if we add a notification in bridge fdb_flush to keep consistence with port fdb_flush?
Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrovwrote: > On 03/16/2016 03:45 PM, Xin Long wrote: >> do you think it''s redundant if we add a notification in bridge >> fdb_flush to keep >> consistence with port fdb_flush? >> > Hmm, technically we're doing this via a sysfs option and the netlink fdb flush > one will generate a notification, so I'd say let's make them all consistent > and > make them all generate a notification, and also making the bridge fdb_flush > use > the bridge_store_parm should be trivial. > okay, I will also make this one use bridge_store_parm. Thanks
Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Xin Longwrote: > yeah, because port fdb_flush is called by brport_store(), in the > common function. > do you think it''s redundant if we add a notification in bridge > fdb_flush to keep > consistence with port fdb_flush? just change it on patch 1/6.