On 03/16/2016 03:45 PM, Xin Long wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov > <niko...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote: >> On 03/16/2016 02:34 PM, Xin Long wrote: >>> Now when we change the attributes of bridge or br_port by netlink, >>> a relevant netlink notification will be sent, but if we change them >>> by ioctl or sysfs, no notification will be sent. >>> >>> We should ensure that whenever those attributes change internally or from >>> sysfs/ioctl, that a netlink notification is sent out to listeners. >>> >>> Also, NetworkManager will use this in the future to listen for out-of-band >>> bridge master attribute updates and incorporate them into the runtime >>> configuration. >>> >>> This patch is used for br_sysfs_if, and we also move br_ifinfo_notify out >>> of store_flag. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com> >>> --- >>> net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c | 5 +++-- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >> >> Generally looks good, but it creates an inconsistency between bridge >> fdb_flush >> and port fdb_flush since the latter will generate a notification while the >> bridge flush will not. >> > yeah, because port fdb_flush is called by brport_store(), in the > common function. Right.
> do you think it''s redundant if we add a notification in bridge > fdb_flush to keep > consistence with port fdb_flush? > Hmm, technically we're doing this via a sysfs option and the netlink fdb flush one will generate a notification, so I'd say let's make them all consistent and make them all generate a notification, and also making the bridge fdb_flush use the bridge_store_parm should be trivial. Thanks, Nik