From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] bridge: remove !IFF_UP restriction when deleting bridge from ioctl
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:23:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140404102357.353fbb08@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1396624550.15118.11.camel@dcbw.local>
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:15:50 -0500
Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-04 at 11:08 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
> > Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 09:56:22 -0500
> >
> > > netlink doesn't care about IFF_UP when deleting a bridge, so "ip link
> > > del br0" works just fine. The ioctl does care, which means that brctl
> > > complains "bridge br0 still up; can't delete it". Make things
> > > consistent by always allowing bridge deletion even if the bridge is up.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > Question: does anyone consider the ioctl behavior API? Can we change it
> > > even though it's been this way forever? It means that bridges that
> > > previously would not have been deleted by brctl will now be deleted.
> > > But anyone using /sbin/ip could already delete them.
> >
> > Unfortunately I think we're stuck with the existing behavior.
>
> Ok, fair enough.
>
> Dan
>
>
That is the way it has been all the way back to 2.4.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-04 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-04 14:56 [RFC PATCH] bridge: remove !IFF_UP restriction when deleting bridge from ioctl Dan Williams
2014-04-04 15:08 ` David Miller
2014-04-04 15:15 ` Dan Williams
2014-04-04 17:23 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
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=20140404102357.353fbb08@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dcbw@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox