Le 07/03/2011 19:34, Stephen Hemminger a écrit :
> This makes the bridge device behave like a physical device.
> In earlier releases the bridge always asserted carrier. This
> changes the behavior so that bridge device carrier is on only
> if one or more ports are in the forwarding state. This
> should help IPv6 autoconfiguration, DHCP, and routing daemons.
>
> I did brief testing with Network and Virt manager and they
> seem fine, but since this changes behavior of bridge, it should
> wait until net-next (2.6.39).
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger<shemminger@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> net/bridge/br_device.c | 4 ++++
> net/bridge/br_stp.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/net/bridge/br_device.c 2011-03-07 08:40:08.913599513 -0800
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_device.c 2011-03-07 08:40:48.382377389 -0800
> @@ -78,6 +78,8 @@ static int br_dev_open(struct net_device
> {
> struct net_bridge *br = netdev_priv(dev);
>
> + netif_carrier_off(dev);
> +
> br_features_recompute(br);
> netif_start_queue(dev);
> br_stp_enable_bridge(br);
> @@ -94,6 +96,8 @@ static int br_dev_stop(struct net_device
> {
> struct net_bridge *br = netdev_priv(dev);
>
> + netif_carrier_off(dev);
> +
> br_stp_disable_bridge(br);
> br_multicast_stop(br);
>
> --- a/net/bridge/br_stp.c 2011-03-07 08:41:58.619783678 -0800
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_stp.c 2011-03-07 08:53:58.953558810 -0800
> @@ -397,28 +397,37 @@ static void br_make_forwarding(struct ne
> void br_port_state_selection(struct net_bridge *br)
> {
> struct net_bridge_port *p;
> + unsigned int liveports = 0;
>
> /* Don't change port states if userspace is handling STP */
> if (br->stp_enabled == BR_USER_STP)
> return;
>
> list_for_each_entry(p,&br->port_list, list) {
> - if (p->state != BR_STATE_DISABLED) {
> - if (p->port_no == br->root_port) {
> - p->config_pending = 0;
> - p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> - br_make_forwarding(p);
> - } else if (br_is_designated_port(p)) {
> - del_timer(&p->message_age_timer);
> - br_make_forwarding(p);
> - } else {
> - p->config_pending = 0;
> - p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> - br_make_blocking(p);
> - }
> + if (p->state == BR_STATE_DISABLED)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (p->port_no == br->root_port) {
> + p->config_pending = 0;
> + p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> + br_make_forwarding(p);
> + } else if (br_is_designated_port(p)) {
> + del_timer(&p->message_age_timer);
> + br_make_forwarding(p);
> + } else {
> + p->config_pending = 0;
> + p->topology_change_ack = 0;
> + br_make_blocking(p);
Is the above part really related to the purpose of this patch? It looks like (good) cleanup, but
should be in a different patch.
Except from this comment,
Reviewed-by: Nicolas de Pesloüan <nicolas.2p.debian@xxxxxxx>
> }
>
> + if (p->state == BR_STATE_FORWARDING)
> + ++liveports;
> }
> +
> + if (liveports == 0)
> + netif_carrier_off(br->dev);
> + else
> + netif_carrier_on(br->dev);
> }
>
> /* called under bridge lock */
> --- a/net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c 2011-03-07 08:53:25.728770710 -0800
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_stp_timer.c 2011-03-07 08:53:40.273116636 -0800
> @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ static void br_forward_delay_timer_expir
> p->state = BR_STATE_FORWARDING;
> if (br_is_designated_for_some_port(br))
> br_topology_change_detection(br);
> + netif_carrier_on(br->dev);
> }
> br_log_state(p);
> spin_unlock(&br->lock);
>
_______________________________________________
Bridge mailing list
Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
