On Fri, 2023-12-01 at 16:28 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 11:41:14 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > > So I had put this aside for a while, but really got annoyed by all > > the test failures now ... thinking about this again I basically now > > arrived at a variant of solution #3 previously outlined, and I've > > kind of convinced myself that userspace should always get an event > > with a new carrier_up_count as it does today. > > Would it work if we exposed "linkwatch is pending" / "link is > transitioning" bit to user space? Not sure, not by much or more than what this did? It's basically the same, I think: I exposed the carrier_up_count at the kernel time, so if userspace hasn't seen an event with a value >= that it knows the link is transitioning. > Even crazier, would it help if we had rtnl_getlink() run > linkwatch for the target link if linkwatch is pending? Sure, if we were to just synchronize that at the right time (doesn't even need to be rtnl_getlink, could be a new operation) that'd solve the issue too, perhaps more easily. johannes
