DL> Honestly, these cases are not frequent but they exists. IMO, it is
DL> up to me to warn you when there are some corner cases like
DL> these. And it is up to you to consider you can ignore them because
DL> that happens only when we reach some limits.
Fair enough :)
DL> It is a good point. But I added this kthread because I needed a
DL> separate workq to cleanup the namespace, without this kthread the
DL> network namespace can not work properly. IMO, it will not be
DL> removed very soon :)
I'm not saying that will be, but it's a side effect of your
implementation, which may or may not be present in a subsequent
revision.
DL> But again, you can ignore that, if you prefer to use the 'ip'
DL> command.
When it really comes down to it, it doesn't matter if the kernel
support is present if the user doesn't have an updated 'ip' binary.
--
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
Open Hypervisor Team
email: danms(a)us.ibm.com