Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] bridge: Add a flag to control unicast packet flood.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 04/29/2013 07:43 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:35:45 -0400
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Add a flag to control flood of unicast traffic.  By default, flood is
on and the bridge will flood unicast traffic if it doesn't know
the destination.  When the flag is turned off, unicast traffic
without an FDB will not be forwarded to the specified port.

Signed-off-by: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>


This a good idea and thank you for doing it. I like that the flag is expressed
as a positive value (rather than an inverse value like no-flood).

The name BR_UNICAST_FLOOD is too long, just use BR_FLOOD and keep the code
shorter.

This doesn't apply against current net-next (same problem as first patch).

Also, I am not a fan of having lots of boolean flag variables in normal
code paths. It ends up reading like PASCAL code. But probably unavoidable in this case.


Sorry, I'll rebase and resubmit.  The alternative there is to possibly
flag skb->cb.  Then we wouldn't need to pass the argument around.
If you'd rather I do that, it's easy enough.

Thanks
-vlad




[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [AoE Tools]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]

  Powered by Linux