Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:10:39 +0200 From: Nikos Vassiliadis <nvass9573@gmx.com> To: Marko Zec <zec@fer.hr> Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_bridge VIMAGE patch Message-ID: <4D2F23FF.9020906@gmx.com> In-Reply-To: <201101131649.50628.zec@fer.hr> References: <4D2EF336.5010905@gmx.com> <201101131649.50628.zec@fer.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/13/2011 5:49 PM, Marko Zec wrote: > On Thursday 13 January 2011 13:42:30 Nikos Vassiliadis wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please, review the attached patch. It is against yesterday's HEAD >> and it virtualizes if_bridge. >> >> You can use the bridgetest script to create quickly a topology >> with redundant links to test STP. > > Looks good to me, though I'm wondering is there any particular reason why you > prefer to create bridge instances in the "root" vnet first, and then move > them to other vnets, instead of creating bridge instances directly in target > vnets? > > In other words: > > ifconfig bridge1 create > ifconfig bridge1 vnet x > > vs > > jexec x ifconfig bridge1 create Yes, there is no real reason. The script is just an aid to quickly create the testing topology. It is also known to break in many situations. > In a near future, each vnet will have its own list of cloning ifnets > (currently only lo and vlan cloners are per-vnet, while other cloning ifnet > types use global cloners), so maybe it might be a good practice to attempt to > avoid having ifnet with its cloner attached in one vnet while being loaned to > another (though in some cases this is unavoidable, such as with epair > ifnets). I see. Thanks, Nikos
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D2F23FF.9020906>