On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 03:50:10PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch series implements a L2 only interface concept which basically > denies > any kind of IP address configuration on these interfaces, but still allows > them > to be used as configuration end-points to keep using ethtool and friends. > > A cleaner approach might be to finally come up with the concept of net_port > which a net_device would be a superset of, but this still raises tons of > questions as to whether we should be modifying userland tools to be able to > configure/query these interfaces. During all the switch talks/discussions last > year, it seemed to me like th L2-only interface is closest we have to a > "network port". > > Comments, flames, flying tomatoes welcome! > > Florian Fainelli (5): > net: add IFF_L2_ONLY flag > net: ipv4: Skip in_dev initialization for IFF_L2_ONLY interfaces > net: ipv6: Skip in6_dev initialization for IFF_L2_ONLY interfaces
interesting idea! Do you know how kernel/iproute2 will react to lack of in_dev? No crashes I'm assuming, but what kind of errors are thrown? imo great first step to have lightweight netdevs. +1 for 'net_port' in the future. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
