From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl0-f66.google.com ([209.85.160.66]:35045 "EHLO mail-pl0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751672AbeCPUhg (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:37:36 -0400 Received: by mail-pl0-f66.google.com with SMTP id p9-v6so4034718pls.2 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:37:33 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Alexander Zubkov Cc: Luca Boccassi , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] treat "default" and "all"/"any" parameters differenty Message-ID: <20180316133733.5be5be82@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <3ded09a4-54f9-9d82-d952-33527a6a3e58@msu.ru> References: <1520942521.12414.1.camel@debian.org> <3ded09a4-54f9-9d82-d952-33527a6a3e58@msu.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 21:19:45 +0100 Alexander Zubkov wrote: > Debian maintainer found that basic command: > # ip route flush all > No longer worked as expected which breaks user scripts and > expectations. It no longer flushed all IPv4 routes. > > Recently behaviour of "default" prefix parameter was corrected. But at > the same time behaviour of "all"/"any" was altered too, because they > were the same branch of the code. As those parameters mean different, > they need to be treated differently in code too. This patch reflects > the difference. > > Reported-by: Luca Boccassi > Signed-off-by: Alexander Zubkov > --- > lib/utils.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/lib/utils.c b/lib/utils.c > index 9fa5220..b289d9c 100644 > --- a/lib/utils.c > +++ b/lib/utils.c > @@ -658,7 +658,8 @@ int get_prefix_1(inet_prefix *dst, char *arg, int > family) > dst->family = family; > dst->bytelen = 0; > dst->bitlen = 0; > - dst->flags |= PREFIXLEN_SPECIFIED; > + if (strcmp(arg, "default") == 0) > + dst->flags |= PREFIXLEN_SPECIFIED; > return 0; > } > > -- > 1.9.1 > Which code is this a patch against? the current master or followup to my revert of the original patch?