search for: ifla_mast

...now which ones to skip and which one is > >the master? Right now userspace seems to assume whatever does not have > >IFF_SLAVE should be looked at. Are you saying that's not the right thing > > Why do you say so? What do you mean by "looked at"? Certainly not. > IFLA_MASTER is the attribute that should be looked at, nothing else. > > > >to do and userspace should be fixed? What should userspace do in > >your opinion that will be forward compatible with future kernels? > > > >> > >> >we don't set IFF_SLAVE existing...

...now which ones to skip and which one is > >the master? Right now userspace seems to assume whatever does not have > >IFF_SLAVE should be looked at. Are you saying that's not the right thing > > Why do you say so? What do you mean by "looked at"? Certainly not. > IFLA_MASTER is the attribute that should be looked at, nothing else. > > > >to do and userspace should be fixed? What should userspace do in > >your opinion that will be forward compatible with future kernels? > > > >> > >> >we don't set IFF_SLAVE existing...

...ip and which one is >> >the master? Right now userspace seems to assume whatever does not have >> >IFF_SLAVE should be looked at. Are you saying that's not the right thing >> >> Why do you say so? What do you mean by "looked at"? Certainly not. >> IFLA_MASTER is the attribute that should be looked at, nothing else. >> >> >> >to do and userspace should be fixed? What should userspace do in >> >your opinion that will be forward compatible with future kernels? >> > >> >> >> >> >we don...

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:13:43PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:39:33PM CEST, mst at redhat.com wrote: > >On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:17:37PM CEST, mst at redhat.com wrote: > >> >On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:14:22PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> Tue, May 22, 2018 at

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:13:43PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:39:33PM CEST, mst at redhat.com wrote: > >On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:26:26PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:17:37PM CEST, mst at redhat.com wrote: > >> >On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 03:14:22PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> Tue, May 22, 2018 at

...ould existing userspace know which ones to skip and which one is >the master? Right now userspace seems to assume whatever does not have >IFF_SLAVE should be looked at. Are you saying that's not the right thing Why do you say so? What do you mean by "looked at"? Certainly not. IFLA_MASTER is the attribute that should be looked at, nothing else. >to do and userspace should be fixed? What should userspace do in >your opinion that will be forward compatible with future kernels? > >> >> >we don't set IFF_SLAVE existing userspace tries to use the lowerdev...