Looking at it more carefully now, I realize why I put it in bridge reconfigure. In port_reconfigure, interfaces do not necessarily have their netdevs initialized yet. Monitoring setup has to happen after they are initialized in bridge reconfigure.
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Ethan Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > Artifact of monitoring being done as part of bonding. I added the > monitors neer port_update_bonding. No particular reason other than > history. I will go ahead and change it. > > Ethan > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 04:03:16PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: >>> The monitoring logic and bonding code are unrelated. This commit >>> pulls the monitoring logic out. As a result all interfaces, not >>> just those participating in bonds, are monitored. This will be >>> required to run LACP on non-bonded ports. >>> >>> Also removes the miimon flag from the port structure. >> >> This looks OK to me, but one bit stuck out to me as not fitting in >> well. The patch adds code to bridge_reconfigure() to call >> netdev_monitor_add() for each interface that should be monitored. I'm >> curious about why it goes in there and not, for example, in >> port_reconfigure(), which to my mind would be a more natural place >> (since that's the code that creates or destroys the monitor itself). >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ben. >> > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
