On 4/6/16, 5:03 PM, "Nikolay Aleksandrov" <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>On 04/06/2016 10:30 PM, Debabrata Banerjee wrote:
>> Set appropriate macvlan interface status based on lower device and our
>> status. Can be up, down, or lowerlayerdown.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Debabrata Banerjee <dbane...@akamai.com>
>>
>
>May I ask what is exactly that you're fixing here ? I recently had to make
>macvlan's
>operstates more accurate and I haven't experienced any wrong behaviour since
>commit
>de7d244d0a35 ("macvlan: make operstate and carrier more accurate").
Yes I saw the other patch, it's an improvement from when I started working on
this.
>Also it's the linkwatch's job to take care for the proper operstate, we can use
>netif_stacked_transfer_operstate to help it, but I don't think directly setting
>operstate is a good idea.
This patch was modeled after __hsr_set_operstate(). But I agree there's probably
better ways to do it. I'm not sure why netif_stacked_transfer_operstate()
doesn't do
it itself, although in the case of a layered device, my patch actually uses the
other
possible state, which is lowerlayerdown. Without the patch operstate goes
directly to
down.
>
>One more thing - you cannot use netdev_state_change() under the write_lock as
>it
>may sleep.
You're right, I can resubmit moving the call out of the critical section, if
the patch
will be taken.
