Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 14:24:07 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> > OK. So why are you testing for "running" rather than "up"? Are these > two synonymous in the kernel? I don't test either of these in my drivers. Ummm... lines 2455-2456 from "drivers/net/8139too.c" in 2.4.21-pre7 read if (!netif_running(dev)) return -EINVAL; This is the first action inside netdev_ioctl(). Is that one of your drivers? (I'm not trying to be difficult or sarcastic, I'm just trying to understand what is going on.) > More generally, I need some help understanding how to configure a > "down" interface to detect link beat. Like I just said, this is mostly impossible. If the interface is down, consider the NIC powered down. There is obviously no link beat. > My program polls the known interfaces to see if there are any > changes to link beat. Right now I'm just ORing in IFF_UP to the > existing set of flags but I worry that by doing so I'm doing too > much. Is there a minimum set of flags that will give me access > to link beat without making the interface fully active? See what I said, above :) Sorry, I expressed myself poorly. What I am asking is not how to test this on a "down" interface, but what are the right changes to make to such an interface so that I can test the link beat. I know that if I bring the interface fully "up" it will work. But that is overkill, and in any case I don't yet know the right IP configuration. All I want to know is whether there is a link beat. For example, is it sufficient to just set IFF_UP and leave the other flags off? Or do I have to be more careful? Chris - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
