netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joe Harvell <joe.harvell@tekcomms.com>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemming@brocade.com>,
	Vadim Kochan <vadim4j@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iproute2: enhance addr label validation
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:43:03 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55103487.5070903@tekcomms.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55101D07.6090301@tekcomms.com>

>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 03:14:53PM -0500, Joe Harvell wrote:
>>> The ip addr command today rejects address labels that would break
>>> ifconfig.  However, it allows some labels which still break it. Enhance
>>> enforcement to reject all known incompatible labels, and allow the
>>> existing -force option to allow someone to use a label even if it is 
>>> not
>>> ifconfig compatible
>> I am concerned this will break existing users who are relying on setting
>> labels that would now be rejected without using -force.
>>
> [snip]
>
> Simon,
>
> Good point.  I propose the following:
>
> When a label is specified without -force, and that label begins with 
> the interface
> name but is followed by something other than a colon, accept the label 
> but emit
> a warning message indicating this label is incompatible with ifconfig 
> and that later
> versions of the 'ip address' command may reject it.  This message can 
> also indicate
> that -force can be specified to explicitly indicate a label that is 
> non ifconfig compatible
> is desired.
>
> At some point in the future, the behavior could then be changed to 
> reject such labels.
>
> What do you think?
>
> ---
> Joe
Ok, I made the changes I propose above, and have pushed them to 
'git@github.com:jharvell/iproute2.git addr-label-noncompat'
with a new signoff commit (303f46819883d4c808974629a6d3515102c5c0d0) 
that summarizes all the changes from master.
But I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with respect to the patch in 
patchwork to designate that I want the new code
to be merged instead of before the change.  Do I reject this patch 
request and submit another one?  Do I send an email
with the same subject as this one with the new patch against master?

Thanks.
---
Joe

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-23 15:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-21 20:14 [PATCH] iproute2: enhance addr label validation Joe Harvell
2015-03-23  1:15 ` Simon Horman
2015-03-23 14:02   ` Joe Harvell
2015-03-23 15:43     ` Joe Harvell [this message]
2015-03-25  0:22       ` Simon Horman
2015-03-25  0:23     ` Simon Horman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-03-21 20:00 Joe Harvell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55103487.5070903@tekcomms.com \
    --to=joe.harvell@tekcomms.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shemming@brocade.com \
    --cc=simon.horman@netronome.com \
    --cc=vadim4j@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).