From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next-next 0/4] rtnetlink: rework handler (un)registering
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 11:57:57 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <20171204.115757.1176520446961809221.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20171202204408.4166-1-fw@strlen.de>
        <20171204.113401.1266159215993063523.davem@davemloft.net>
        <20171204165304.GC28667@breakpoint.cc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: fw@strlen.de
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:49894 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752025AbdLDQ56 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 4 Dec 2017 11:57:58 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20171204165304.GC28667@breakpoint.cc>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 17:53:04 +0100

> The only difference is that theoretically some addrlabel rtnetlink
> ops are not available if registration fails, but thats not really worse
> than before as this used to panic() instead :-)
> 
> I can send a followup patch, to convert all of ipv6, should be easy
> to propagate errors from addrlabel initialisation to its callsite.

Yes, please make ipv6 consistent in this area when you get a chance.

Thanks.