Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 05:54:19PM CEST, davem@davemloft.net wrote:

From: Nicolas Dichtel <redacted>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 13:59:34 +0200

quoted

Le 27/04/2016 18:55, David Miller a écrit :

quoted

From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>

[snip]

quoted

quoted

The difference is that it this tries to allow userspace crap to mirror
setting user does for bridge/ovs. Basically this looks to me like an
attempt to enable userspace SDKs and such.

+1

I don't think so because a userspace can receive all the bridge/ovs settings by
mean of netlink mirror, without the need for this driver at all.

You can say whatever you want, but the facilities you are adding to
this driver enables proprietary userland SDK components.

And this is precisely what we are trying to avoid by having a clean,
fully featured switch device model in the kernel.

It is against your interestes of upstreaming your driver to continue
denying what your changes facilitate.

+1

Nicolas, your driver is big a step back. Just do what you need to do,
properly, in kernel. There's a lot of people to help you with that
around.