Hi Yoshifuji-san I have a question:
YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 wrote:
commit bd292ad1ccbf15c72351f79d4a130dd50da81613 Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu Feb 15 02:07:27 2007 +0900 [IPV6] ADDRCONF: Register inet6_dev earlier.Allocate inet6_dev earlier to allow users to set up per-interface variables. Signed-off-by: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c index c6683ea..42b5cc5 100644 --- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c +++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c @@ -2246,6 +2246,14 @@ static int addrconf_notify(struct notifier_block *this, unsigned long event, int run_pending = 0;switch(event) {+ case NETDEV_REGISTER: + if (!idev) { + idev = ipv6_add_dev(dev); + if (!idev) + printk(KERN_WARNING "IPv6: add_dev failed for %s\n", + dev->name); + } + break; case NETDEV_UP: case NETDEV_CHANGE: if (event == NETDEV_UP) {
In this case, ipv6_add_dev will join the all-nodes multicast group on the interface that may be still down. Is that an issue at all?
It seems that this operation would be better performed when the interface is marked up?
Thanks -vlad - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
