Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if

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

Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if

On 03/16/2016 03:45 PM, Xin Long wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov > 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,

Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov 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

Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:49 PM, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: > On 03/16/2016 03:45 PM, Xin Long wrote: >> 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

Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] bridge: a netlink notification should be sent when those attributes are changed by br_sysfs_if

On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Xin Long wrote: > yeah, because port fdb_flush is called by brport_store(), in the > common function. > do you think it''s redundant if we add a notification in bridge > fdb_flush to keep > consistence with port fdb_flush? just change it on