From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Sutter Subject: Re: [iproute PATCH 1/2] ipaddress: Simplify vf_info parsing Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 19:50:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20160701175001.GG19370@orbyte.nwl.cc> References: <1464811430-19415-1-git-send-email-phil@nwl.cc> <1464811430-19415-2-git-send-email-phil@nwl.cc> <20160601220750.GC2729@orbyte.nwl.cc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Stephen Hemminger , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: Greg Rose Return-path: Received: from orbyte.nwl.cc ([151.80.46.58]:56739 "EHLO mail.nwl.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751680AbcGARuE (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2016 13:50:04 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 03:36:09PM -0700, Greg Rose wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Phil Sutter wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 03:00:08PM -0700, Greg Rose wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Phil Sutter wrote: > >> > Not sure whether I misinterpret commit 7b8179c780a1a, but it looks > >> > overly complicated. Instead rely upon parse_rtattr_nested() to assign > >> > the relevant pointer if requested rtattr fields are present. > >> > >> I'm not sure if newer iproute2 utilities are supposed to work on older > >> kernels but if it is you may want to check this against a 2.6.32 > >> kernel. > > > > Yes, it is supposed to. Actually I tried, but the old RHEL6 kernel I > > used didn't export the VF list at all and then I lost motivation. > > > > I didn't check all earlier versions of 7b8179c780a1a, was there a stage > > when it looked like what I'm changing it to? > > I don't think so but your patch looks correct - I mean it looks like > it should work. > > It's been 5 years since I wrote that original patch and my memory > isn't so great as to why I didn't just do as your patch does but I > think it had something to do with not all drivers reporting a spoof > check value. However, your patch should handle that case so I see no > reason not to accept it. Unfortunately I don't have time or the > resources at the moment to check it on an older kernel. So can I count that as your Acked-by? ;) Looks like Stephen hesitates to accept this patch due to the discussion it provoked. Cheers, Phil