From: Joe Harvell <joe.harvell@tekcomms.com>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemming@brocade.com>,
Vadim Kochan <vadim4j@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute2: enhance addr label validation
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:43:03 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55103487.5070903@tekcomms.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55101D07.6090301@tekcomms.com>
>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 03:14:53PM -0500, Joe Harvell wrote:
>>> The ip addr command today rejects address labels that would break
>>> ifconfig. However, it allows some labels which still break it. Enhance
>>> enforcement to reject all known incompatible labels, and allow the
>>> existing -force option to allow someone to use a label even if it is
>>> not
>>> ifconfig compatible
>> I am concerned this will break existing users who are relying on setting
>> labels that would now be rejected without using -force.
>>
> [snip]
>
> Simon,
>
> Good point. I propose the following:
>
> When a label is specified without -force, and that label begins with
> the interface
> name but is followed by something other than a colon, accept the label
> but emit
> a warning message indicating this label is incompatible with ifconfig
> and that later
> versions of the 'ip address' command may reject it. This message can
> also indicate
> that -force can be specified to explicitly indicate a label that is
> non ifconfig compatible
> is desired.
>
> At some point in the future, the behavior could then be changed to
> reject such labels.
>
> What do you think?
>
> ---
> Joe
Ok, I made the changes I propose above, and have pushed them to
'git@github.com:jharvell/iproute2.git addr-label-noncompat'
with a new signoff commit (303f46819883d4c808974629a6d3515102c5c0d0)
that summarizes all the changes from master.
But I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with respect to the patch in
patchwork to designate that I want the new code
to be merged instead of before the change. Do I reject this patch
request and submit another one? Do I send an email
with the same subject as this one with the new patch against master?
Thanks.
---
Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-23 15:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-21 20:14 [PATCH] iproute2: enhance addr label validation Joe Harvell
2015-03-23 1:15 ` Simon Horman
2015-03-23 14:02 ` Joe Harvell
2015-03-23 15:43 ` Joe Harvell [this message]
2015-03-25 0:22 ` Simon Horman
2015-03-25 0:23 ` Simon Horman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-03-21 20:00 Joe Harvell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55103487.5070903@tekcomms.com \
--to=joe.harvell@tekcomms.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemming@brocade.com \
--cc=simon.horman@netronome.com \
--cc=vadim4j@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.