[crossbow-discuss] [brussels-dev] [networking-discuss] code review Brussels persistence

[Artem Kachitchkine]

Sowmini.Varadhan at Sun.COM wrote:
>> d. Do we still need special handling for wifi devices in network-physical? 
>> Also, is it possible for "dladm init-linkprop" to take one specific name 
>> (which requires the changes in the do_init_linkprop() function)?
> 
> Artem can confirm, but we'll need this as long as the wifi drivers
> are not converted to provide Brussels callbacks.. we're working with
> the wifi team to eliminate the wifi ioctls and replace them
> with Brussels callbacks..

dladm_init_linkprop() will issue the right ioctls for wifi. We used to 
care about the ioctl initially, when we tapped into SETPROP for caching, 
but with the elimination of mac_prop_init, I don't think we care anymore 
or need this line in network-physical.

>> e. I don't think we should to keep the link property values in the kernel 
>> and we can safely remove the whole dls_prop.c file, especially that 1) 
>> today there are no consumers for that, and 2) some of link properties 
>> simply do not go through the dls_set_prop() code path. If we need the 
>> kernel copy one day, it should be easy to add them back.
> 
> I would still vote in favor of keeping them.. as Artem pointed out it 
> helps with providing mdb support for finding what customizations
> were done when we are looking at a crash dump. This was one of the
> big complaints about ndd- that we can't figure out this information
> from a crash dump easily.

I can bend either way. At this point, I am agreeing to anything ;)

-Artem