From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] gre: do not assign header_ops in collect metadata mode Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2016 03:41:43 +0200 Message-ID: <20160423014143.GC32327@pox.localdomain> References: <7c34e7243a146fc5ccdf6349892355746741ff26.1461346798.git.jbenc@redhat.com> <20160422232054.3f6b47da@griffin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: pravin shelar , Linux Kernel Network Developers , Pravin B Shelar , Simon Horman To: Jiri Benc Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:33494 "EHLO mail-wm0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751718AbcDWBlr (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Apr 2016 21:41:47 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f48.google.com with SMTP id 127so12748723wmz.0 for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:41:46 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160422232054.3f6b47da@griffin> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 04/22/16 at 11:20pm, Jiri Benc wrote: > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 14:04:48 -0700, pravin shelar wrote: > > I think we should we return error in case of such configuration rather > > than silently ignoring it. > > I thought about it and I'm not sure. We're not returning an error > currently, starting returning it now might be perceived as uAPI > breakage. > > But given it doesn't work at all currently, there are apparently no > users yet. I'll wait for more feedback. As a user, I would probably favour receiving an error for a configuration that can't possibly work and was not working before.