From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Subject: Re: [Patch net] ipv6: restore the behavior of ipv6_sock_ac_drop() Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2014 00:26:25 +0200 Message-ID: <1409955985.1192797.164218289.4192DDA7@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1409952780-24471-1-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sabrina Dubroca , "David S. Miller" To: Cong Wang , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:50161 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751211AbaIEW00 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Sep 2014 18:26:26 -0400 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by gateway2.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E6D820DA7 for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2014 18:26:25 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <1409952780-24471-1-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Cong, Just doing normal review, really no bad intentions, just technical follow-up. ;) On Fri, Sep 5, 2014, at 23:33, Cong Wang wrote: > It is possible that the interface is already gone after joining > the list of anycast on this interface as we don't hold a refcount > for the device, in this case we are safe to ignore the error. anycast code actually inserts routes into the routing table and holds a reference on the interface while that route is active. > What's more important, for API compatibility we should not > change this behavior for applications even if it were correct. IMHO adding new error codes never breaks existing applications because there is no way they can explore all possible errno variables. Also we already report ENODEV from multicast setsockopts. So I think it would be ok to leave it as is, but I have no strong opinion on that and it would be ok by me if the patch got accepted (maybe update the changelog). Thanks, Hannes