Patrick McHardy wrote:
Stefan Rompf wrote:
Am Dienstag 04 Juli 2006 12:07 schrieb Patrick McHardy:
- new_dev->state = real_dev->state & VLAN_LINK_STATE_MASK;
+ new_dev->state = real_dev->state & ~(1<<__LINK_STATE_START);
This change looks funky because it ignores the link state mask.
Anyway, is it good to propagate __LINK_STATE_PRESENT then? The same situation
here, add a VLAN while the main interface is "not present", and you are out.
Can you try to revert the quoted part of my patch, I'll rethink which flags
should be copied on device creation.
I tried both adding LINK_STATE_XOFF to the negated flags and using
VLAN_LINK_STATE_MASK, both as expected solve the problem for me.
I have to admit I was wondering about LINK_STATE_PRESENT as well
(was going to complain about that too until I noticed it is also
set in VLAN_LINK_STATE_MASK). Maybe Ben can tell us the idea behind
this?
I believe this link-state logic was added by someone else. I'm not
sure exactly what these flags are supposed to do, so I am not sure if they
should be propagated to the VLAN or not.
Ben
--
Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
-
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
