quot;Vijay Pandurangan"
> <vij...@vijayp.ca>, "Paolo Abeni"
> <pab...@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 9:15:01 AM
> Subject: Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied
> together
>
> Le 08/06/201
Le 08/06/2016 22:30, Lance Richardson a écrit :
[snip]
> I've been pondering how to fix this very problem off-and-on for a few months
> now, without having arrived at any solution that was particularly satisfying.
>
> The main constraints I've been trying to meet are:
>- User-space should be
t;Paolo Abeni"
> <pab...@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 5:17:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied
> together
>
> Le 31/05/2016 08:29, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
> > ❦ 30 mai 2016 18
Le 31/05/2016 08:29, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
> ❦ 30 mai 2016 18:27 CEST, Nicolas Dichtel :
>
+
+ rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, peer, IFF_SLAVE, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>
>>> Maybe ~0U would be better than hijacking IFF_SLAVE?
>> IFF_SLAVE is wrong. It's a flag here,
❦ 30 mai 2016 18:27 CEST, Nicolas Dichtel :
>>> +
>>> + rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, peer, IFF_SLAVE, GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>> Maybe ~0U would be better than hijacking IFF_SLAVE?
> IFF_SLAVE is wrong. It's a flag here, that will be put in the ifi_change field
> not an
Le 30/05/2016 18:01, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
> ❦ 30 mai 2016 17:58 CEST, Vincent Bernat :
>
>> +
>> +rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, peer, IFF_SLAVE, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Maybe ~0U would be better than hijacking IFF_SLAVE?
IFF_SLAVE is wrong. It's a flag here, that will be put in
❦ 30 mai 2016 17:58 CEST, Vincent Bernat :
> +
> + rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK, peer, IFF_SLAVE, GFP_KERNEL);
Maybe ~0U would be better than hijacking IFF_SLAVE?
--
Anyone who has had a bull by the tail knows five or six more things
than someone who hasn't.
When the peer link is created, its "iflink" information is not
advertised through Netlink. Once created, the local device is advertised
with this information but if a user is maintaining a cache from all
updates, it will still miss the iflink for the peer link:
2: veth0@NONE: