On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
quoted text
> On Friday 13 March 2009 08:09:49 Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Thursday 12 March 2009 23:22:35 David Miller wrote:
>> > If the link is always on, you should make that explicit by providing
>> > a link state handler, and making sure it always returns true.
>>
>> "If".  We've discussed adding a virtio_net feature to indicate link status,
>> which implies that it's *not* always on.
>
> Actually, I've changed my mind.
>
> Unlike a device which *has* a carrier which we can't detect, there's no
> virtio_net "device" which can turn off link (not kvm/qemu, not lguest) without
> the pending VIRTIO_NET_S_LINK feature.

Exactly :)

quoted text
>
> Here's the patch for Dave's tree; the q. is do we want to put Pantelis' patch
> in 2.6.29 and stable?

It would be cool to put my patch in 2.6.29 since it is not intrusive
(just a quickfix)
and then drop it in favor of the proper carrier detection / control +
your patch.

Thanks,
Pantelis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html