From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Subject: Re: [patch net-next] ipv6: allow userspace to create address with IFLA_F_TEMPORARY flag Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 01:13:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20131029001340.GC26185@order.stressinduktion.org> References: <20131027164835.GB4714@order.stressinduktion.org> <20131028.171725.1076499130782328273.davem@davemloft.net> <1383002179.28991.14.camel@dcbw.foobar.com> <20131028.200810.66180312939474324.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: dcbw@redhat.com, jiri@resnulli.us, vyasevich@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, thaller@redhat.com, stephen@networkplumber.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from order.stressinduktion.org ([87.106.68.36]:34915 "EHLO order.stressinduktion.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753546Ab3J2ANl (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:13:41 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131028.200810.66180312939474324.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 08:08:10PM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Dan Williams > Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:16:19 -0500 > > > On Mon, 2013-10-28 at 17:17 -0400, David Miller wrote: > > First off, what's the reasoning behind having IPv6 privacy as a config > > option? It's off-by-default and must be explicitly turned on, so is > > there any harm in removing the config? Or is it just for > > smallest-kernel-ever folks? > > I think it's for "smallest kernel ever" stuff. Even every arch > defconfig that mentions it has it enabled :-) > > Maybe it was optional initially because the code was new and > experimental'ish. I don't know. > > Regardless of the reason I think it only obfuscates the code with > ifdefs right now and I would be happy to see it disappear. > > Any objections to this patch? Yeah, I changed my mind. The ifdefs are really hideous. Fine for me. Greetings, Hannes