From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EBB715B97C for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:11:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709133104; cv=none; b=fA/PaKigWSB77XuPwF5taWOkh2rmlWAMmlaCFfzURBpSi5ewRBmgNjWdr8z0UNfKogPAHhK3KvQ7zXbHtpqlewXn5mKsY2O9pjELsgdu389g571A/Vu6rRyFfQzogafrxBsI6dBKWhH7geIUPqm9KlWs32lSGOUbQbTYAFUbfIA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709133104; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RS6MJmosP807L6gRHG3o2sEXO8NSts7Ny2svQq+6A3o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=YPgO83HppVm1JKlq7+a7dlCE9pNvbqhXgzQvainc2j1JFIbjCvg2i8BjVymu3+BojomvAsonGUh8b8vAwQpy2JRRYsGJJnscpTdquTa93W113hw3VV6bhB4W332ymKXmezouP7RFACVmLXyD1qlLCFAqDXa3+HU3IvFDsz1Esk0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ZpcrobOo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ZpcrobOo" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B2AF6C433C7; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:11:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1709133104; bh=RS6MJmosP807L6gRHG3o2sEXO8NSts7Ny2svQq+6A3o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ZpcrobOoT7TA4wIwsHZqx/JUsHR0HMIc5MB2MniLWIsfmtVAwZ19nAEnjFHTT/AaS LXFWb98P427SrT3xP86Zaf9ZjwebnVLy/TQnlIFdxBfw2YPuF7bsPGgVuHAQspnNpv xXVEW6Tlk9xUc6YKFN70h3DL22WAuoe2LJl92y/YDZS1yg0JnVncwxAboF6uNMGi7m Zin6NNEhSyXa+OxTq2jL/YY1LUgd+aGLpMOSkbC/kX3NhCpp3iR17mWCOp6HUlBow0 kRkoTPY6EcMZNVjkEN7Bv9ryA2gj94POCIspoFMBzjA70hCQ+RNmQeJpTo4eTaOs6p /YIzn2g4wTYXA== Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 07:11:42 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Eric Dumazet Cc: "David S . Miller" , Paolo Abeni , David Ahern , Jiri Pirko , netdev@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 03/15] ipv6: addrconf_disable_ipv6() optimizations Message-ID: <20240228071142.29c8fe1c@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20240227150200.2814664-1-edumazet@google.com> <20240227150200.2814664-4-edumazet@google.com> <20240227185157.37355343@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:28:28 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Good catch, I simply misread the line. > > I note that addrconf_disable_policy() does not have a similar write. > > When writing on net->ipv6.devconf_all->disable_policy, we loop over all idev > to call addrconf_disable_policy_idev(), > but we do _not_ change net->ipv6.devconf_dflt->disable_policy > > This seems quite strange we change net->ipv6.devconf_dflt->disable_ipv6 when > user only wanted to change net->ipv6.devconf_all->disable_policy The all / default behavior is a complete mess, I don't mind changing! I commented because there was a flake in TCP-AO tests and I was trying to find any functional changes :)