Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>> +static int veth_newlink(struct net_device *dev,
>> +                     struct nlattr *tb[], struct nlattr *data[])
>> +{
>> +    int err;
>> +    struct net_device *peer;
>> +    struct veth_priv *priv;
>> +    char ifname[IFNAMSIZ];
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * prepare the devices info
>> +     */
>> +
>> +    if (tb[IFLA_ADDRESS] == NULL)
>> +            random_ether_addr(dev->dev_addr);
>> +
>> +    if (data != NULL && data[VETH_INFO_PEER] != NULL) {
>> +            err = nla_parse_nested(tb, IFLA_INFO_MAX,
>> +                            data[VETH_INFO_PEER], ifla_policy);
>> +            if (err < 0)
>> +                    return err;
>> +    }
> 
> 
> Not having a peer should be an error, no?
> 
>> +
>> +    if (tb[IFLA_IFNAME])
>> +            nla_strlcpy(ifname, tb[IFLA_IFNAME], IFNAMSIZ);
>> +    else
>> +            snprintf(ifname, IFNAMSIZ, DRV_NAME "%%d");
> 
> 
> Does this work? The other device is not registered at this time, so I
> think the allocated names could clash ..

Oh! And one more thing, I've just thought about - even two devices with
similar name would be ok when we have a namespaces and one of the ends of
this tunnel is to be in some other namespace rather that the init one.

> If it does work you could also perform name allocation in the
> rtnl_create_link function.
> 
> 
>> +
>> +    peer = rtnl_create_link(ifname, &veth_link_ops, tb);
>> +    if (IS_ERR(peer))
>> +            return PTR_ERR(peer);
>> +
>> +    if (tb[IFLA_ADDRESS] == NULL)
>> +            random_ether_addr(peer->dev_addr);
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * register devices
>> +     */
>> +
>> +    err = register_netdevice(peer);
>> +    if (err < 0)
>> +            goto err_register_peer;
>> +
>> +    err = register_netdevice(dev);
>> +    if (err < 0)
>> +            goto err_register_dev;
>> +
>> +    /*
>> +     * tie the deviced together
>> +     */
>> +
>> +    priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +    priv->dev = dev;
>> +    priv->peer = peer;
>> +    list_add(&priv->list, &veth_list);
>> +
>> +    priv = netdev_priv(peer);
>> +    priv->dev = peer;
>> +    priv->peer = dev;
>> +    INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->list);
>> +    return 0;
>> +
>> +err_register_dev:
>> +    unregister_netdevice(peer);
>> +    return err;
>> +
>> +err_register_peer:
>> +    free_netdev(peer);
>> +    return err;
>> +}
> 
>> +static __exit void veth_exit(void)
>> +{
>> +    struct veth_priv *priv, *next;
>> +
>> +    rtnl_lock();
>> +    __rtnl_link_unregister(&veth_link_ops);
>> +
>> +    list_for_each_entry_safe(priv, next, &veth_list, list)
>> +            veth_dellink(priv->dev);
>> +    rtnl_unlock();
> 
> 
> Devices are unregistered automatically through the dellink function,
> rtnl_link_unregister(..) is enough.
> 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to