From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: sysfs^H^H^H^H^Hsysctl warnings, reserved names Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2012 13:11:41 -0800 Message-ID: References: <41230e67c273dde6b60cfc7110f496e2@visp.net.lb> <1329475042.2861.5.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> <1329476631.2861.8.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> <1329483934.2861.12.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Denys Fedoryshchenko , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:35559 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755115Ab2BSVIn (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:08:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1329483934.2861.12.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> (Eric Dumazet's message of "Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:05:34 +0100") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Eric Dumazet writes: >> Well we are talking about sysctl not sysfs but same difference, I keep >> an on eye on them. >> >> I expect renaming a network device to "all" or "default" would be a >> problem in any kernel supporting renaming of networking devices. >> >> At the basic level of handling it. sysctl checks for this sometimes >> now and as soon as my sysctl tree is merged the checks will become >> unconditionally present. In what sense were you thinking it would >> be better to address this in the sysctl? >> > > Because problem is : it seems a rename() of "eth3" to "default" is > allowed by sysctl, yet "default" is already in directory. > > It seems sysfs_rename_link() / sysfs_rename_dir() / sysfs_rename() might > have a problem ? The files are under /proc/sys so we are talking about sysctls, which means that the error is reported from register_net_sysctl_table. The path is: NETDEV_CHANGENAME devinet_sysctl_unregister() -> void devinet_sysctl_register() -> void return NOTIFY_DONE; Eric