From: David Ahern <d...@cumulusnetworks.com> Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 22:54:07 -0400
> On 4/8/17 10:33 PM, David Miller wrote: >> From: David Ahern <d...@cumulusnetworks.com> >> Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 18:24:06 -0400 >> >>> per comments on the email thread about reducing notifications, the >>> kernel patch for this should be reverted (and hence this iproute2 patch >>> is not needed) in favor of using a bitmask. Right now there are too many >>> redundant notifications to userspace. >> >> I must have missed something in all the discussion, which patch needs >> to be reverted from my tree exactly? >> > > Here's the thread: > https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg429154.html > > The comment is that def12888c161 is adding a uapi that leads to way too > many notifications (e.g., on a setlink). > > It would be more efficient (read less notifications) to have do_setlink > emit a single message with the IFLA_EVENT (or something else > appropriately named) that indicates what attributes changed. Right now, > a change MTU leads to 3 notifications causing unnecessary churn in > userspace to track what the state of the link is. Ok, I'll queue up the revert. I guess this means your rtnetlink patch set is going to need changes or a respin, therefore.
