Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-06-10 Thread Lance Richardson
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

Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-06-10 Thread Nicolas Dichtel
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

Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-06-08 Thread Lance Richardson
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

Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-05-31 Thread Nicolas Dichtel
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,

Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-05-31 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 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

Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-05-30 Thread Nicolas Dichtel
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

Re: [net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-05-30 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 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.

[net v3] veth: advertise peer link once both links are tied together

2016-05-30 Thread Vincent Bernat
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: