On 2020-11-18 15:47, Xie He wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:59 AM Martin Schiller <ms@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
---
Changes to v2:
o restructure complete patch-set
o keep netdev event handling in layer3 (X.25)
But... Won't it be better to handle L2 connections in L2 code?
For example, if we are running X.25 over XOT, we can decide in the XOT
layer whether and when we reconnect in case the TCP connection is
dropped. We can decide how long we wait for responses before we
consider the TCP connection to be dropped.
If we still want "on-demand" connections in certain L2's, we can also
implement it in that L2 without the need to change L3.
Every L2 has its own characteristics. It might be better to let
different L2's handle their connections in their own way. This gives
L2 the flexibility to handle their connections according to their
actual link characteristics.
Letting L3 handle L2 connections also makes L2 code too related to /
coupled with L3 code, which makes the logic complex.
OK, I will give it a try. But we need to keep the possibility to
initiate and terminate the L2 connection from L3.
In the on demand scenario i mentioned, the L2 should be connected when
the first L3 logical channel goes up and needs to be disconnected, when
the last L3 logical channel on an interface is cleared.
o add patch to fix lapb_connect_request() for DCE
o add patch to handle carrier loss correctly in lapb
o drop patch for x25_neighbour param handling
this may need fixes/cleanup and will be resubmitted later.
Changes to v1:
o fix 'subject_prefix' and 'checkpatch' warnings
---
Martin Schiller (6):
net/x25: handle additional netdev events
net/lapb: fix lapb_connect_request() for DCE
net/lapb: handle carrier loss correctly
net/lapb: fix t1 timer handling for DCE
net/x25: fix restart request/confirm handling
net/x25: remove x25_kill_by_device()
