search for: is_static

Displaying 16 results from an estimated 16 matches for "is_static".

Did you mean: _static
2023 Jan 19
1
[Bridge] [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
...2023 at 11:33:58AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:14:00PM +0100, netdev at kapio-technology.com wrote: > > > > + item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags); > > > > > > Why reverse logic? Why not just name this "is_static" and leave any > > > further interpretations up to the consumer? > > > > My reasoning for this is that the common case is to have static entries, > > thus is_dyn=false, so whenever someone uses a switchdev_notifier_fdb_info > > struct the common case does not...
2023 Jan 19
1
[Bridge] [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 11:14:00PM +0100, netdev at kapio-technology.com wrote: > > > + item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags); > > > > Why reverse logic? Why not just name this "is_static" and leave any > > further interpretations up to the consumer? > > My reasoning for this is that the common case is to have static entries, > thus is_dyn=false, so whenever someone uses a switchdev_notifier_fdb_info > struct the common case does not need to be entered. >...
2023 Jan 18
1
[Bridge] [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
...gt;flags); >> item->offloaded = test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags); >> item->is_local = test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags); >> + item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags); > > Why reverse logic? Why not just name this "is_static" and leave any > further interpretations up to the consumer? > My reasoning for this is that the common case is to have static entries, thus is_dyn=false, so whenever someone uses a switchdev_notifier_fdb_info struct the common case does not need to be entered. Otherwise it might al...
2023 Jan 17
1
[Bridge] [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
...ED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags); > item->offloaded = test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags); > item->is_local = test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags); > + item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags); Why reverse logic? Why not just name this "is_static" and leave any further interpretations up to the consumer? > item->locked = false; > item->info.dev = (!p || item->is_local) ? br->dev : p->dev; > item->info.ctx = ctx; > -- > 2.34.1 >
2023 Mar 30
2
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...r "net" is merged into "net-next" next Thursday (the ship has sailed for today), add "bool static" to the switchdev notifier info, and make all switchdev drivers (everywhere where a SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE handler appears) ignore the "added_by_user && !is_static" combination, but by their own choice and not by switchdev's choice. Then, make DSA decide whether to handle the "added_by_user && !is_static" combination or not, based on the presence of the DSA_FDB_FLAG_DYNAMIC flag, which will be set in ds->supported_fdb_flags only...
2023 Mar 30
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 18:07, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote: > > Then, make DSA decide whether to handle the "added_by_user && !is_static" > combination or not, based on the presence of the DSA_FDB_FLAG_DYNAMIC > flag, which will be set in ds->supported_fdb_flags only for the mv88e6xxx > driver. Okay, so this will require a new function in the DSA layer that sets which flags are supported and that the driver will ca...
2005 Sep 21
2
locking.tdb: expand_file ftruncate to 8192 failed (Permission denied)
Hi, I'm hunting a bug in 3.0.x (tested on 3.0.10 and 3.0.20). Users can create and modfy files, but cannot delete them. The logs show [2005/09/21 20:48:14, 0, pid=18388, effective(4019, 412), real(4019, 0)] tdb/tdbutil.c:tdb_log(767) tdb(/srv/physik.fu-berlin.de/data/.samba/cluster1-test/cache/locking.tdb): expand_file ftruncate to 8192 failed (Permission denied) [2005/09/21 20:48:15, 0,
2023 Mar 30
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 16:09, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 02:59:04PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 15:43, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 09:45:26PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote: >> >> So the solution would be to not let the DSA layer send the
2023 Feb 17
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: implementation of dynamic ATU entries
...ression is non-zero. This way you would kill 2 birds with 1 stone, since individual drivers would no longer need to check the flags; DSA would guarantee not calling them with unsupported flags. It would be also very good to reach an agreement with switchdev maintainers regarding the naming of the is_static/is_dyn field. It would also be excellent if you could rename "fdb_flags" to just "flags" within DSA.
2023 Mar 18
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 1/6] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
To be able to add dynamic FDB entries to drivers from userspace, the dynamic flag must be added when sending RTM_NEWNEIGH events down. Signed-off-by: Hans J. Schultz <netdev at kapio-technology.com> --- include/net/switchdev.h | 1 + net/bridge/br_switchdev.c | 1 + 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/include/net/switchdev.h b/include/net/switchdev.h index
2007 Apr 18
0
[Bridge] [PATCH] (4/4) bridge forwarding table RCU
....c b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c --- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c 2004-07-28 15:30:04 -07:00 +++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c 2004-07-28 15:30:04 -07:00 @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ static __inline__ void fdb_delete(struct net_bridge_fdb_entry *f) { - hlist_del(&f->hlist); + hlist_del_rcu(&f->hlist); if (!f->is_static) list_del(&f->age_list); @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ struct net_bridge *br = p->br; int i; - write_lock_bh(&br->hash_lock); + spin_lock_bh(&br->hash_lock); /* Search all chains since old address/hash is unknown */ for (i = 0; i < BR_HASH_SIZE; i++) { @@ -117,7 +11...
2003 Apr 04
2
2.2.1a / 2.2.2 bug is back in 2.2.8
Hello, Back when 2.2.2 was the current samba release I came across the following problem when deleting folders in Windows 2000 which I'll repost again below. After I finally got his attention with a few very wordy messages to the samba mailing list, Jeremy fixed it blazingly fast and wrote me back: "I just found the problem and fixed it in 2.2 CVS and HEAD CVS. It was to do with the
2009 Nov 03
0
[PATCH server] suggest ip address for nics/bondings on edit host/vm network forms
...git a/src/app/models/network.rb b/src/app/models/network.rb index 22e5692..c9d5d84 100644 --- a/src/app/models/network.rb +++ b/src/app/models/network.rb @@ -42,5 +42,16 @@ class Network < ActiveRecord::Base end end + # return true / false if network has statically assigned ips + def is_static? + !boot_type.nil? && boot_type.proto == "static" + end + + # generate an ip address for this network based on the + # associated IpAddress and specified array of addreses already used + def gen_address(used_addresses = []) + return nil if ip_addresses.nil? || ip_addre...
2007 Apr 18
5
[Bridge] RFC: [PATCH] bridge vlan integration
...+#endif } return -EOPNOTSUPP; Index: wireless-dev/net/bridge/br_private.h =================================================================== --- wireless-dev.orig/net/bridge/br_private.h +++ wireless-dev/net/bridge/br_private.h @@ -59,6 +59,14 @@ struct net_bridge_fdb_entry unsigned char is_static; }; +#ifdef CONFIG_BRIDGE_VLAN +struct net_bridge_port_vlan +{ + int untagged; + u8 filter[4096/8]; +}; +#endif + struct net_bridge_port { struct net_bridge *br; @@ -84,6 +92,9 @@ struct net_bridge_port struct kobject kobj; struct work_struct carrier_check; struct rcu_head...
2013 Jan 09
16
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next V5 00/14] Add basic VLAN support to bridges
This series of patches provides an ability to add VLANs to the bridge ports. This is similar to what can be found in most switches. The bridge port may have any number of VLANs added to it including vlan 0 priority tagged traffic. When vlans are added to the port, only traffic tagged with particular vlan will forwarded over this port. Additionally, vlan ids are added to FDB entries and become
2013 Feb 13
14
[Bridge] [PATCH v10 net-next 00/12] VLAN filtering/VLAN aware bridge
Changes since v9: * series re-ordering so make functionality more distinct. Basic vlan filtering is patches 1-4. Support for PVID/untagged vlans is patches 5 and 6. VLAN support for FDB/MDB is patches 7-11. Patch 12 is still additional egress policy. * Slight simplification to code that extracts the VID from skb. Since we now depend on the vlan module, at the time of input skb_tci is