Re: [RFC PATCH v0 1/2] net: bridge: propagate FDB table into hardware

On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 09:25 -0800, John Fastabend wrote:

Well I think NETLINK_ROUTE is the most correct type to use in this
case. Per netlink.h its for routing and device hooks.

#define NETLINK_ROUTE           0       /* Routing/device hook                          */

And NETLINK_ROUTE msg_types use the RTM_* prefix. The _*NEIGH postfix
were merely a copy from the SW BRIDGE code paths. How about,

PF_BRIDGE:RTM_FDB_NEWENTRY
PF_BRIDGE:RTM_FDB_DELENTRY
PF_BRIDGE:RTM_FDB_GETENTRY

OK, I guess ;->

And a new group RTNLGRP_FDB. 

Nod.

Also using NETLINK_ROUTE gives the correct
rtnl locking semantics for free.

makes sense.

Agreed. I think adding some ndo_ops for bridging offloads here would
work. For example the DSA infrastructure and/or macvlan devices might
need this. Along the lines of extending this RFC,

[RFC] hardware bridging support for DSA switches
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/16578/

Certainly - thats one approach that is reasonable.
Where is Lennert? ;-> I changed his email address to one that i am 
familiar with.

cheers,
jamal