From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1E2C433ED for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:04:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B16613FB for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:04:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233526AbhDWEFQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 00:05:16 -0400 Received: from so254-9.mailgun.net ([198.61.254.9]:52549 "EHLO so254-9.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232098AbhDWEFP (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 00:05:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1619150679; h=Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Cc: To: From: Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: MIME-Version: Sender; bh=1G7DPv+dUKAyqtSBeEFPxTQF0zmDWYdFqoKBXFZqScw=; b=b2kVwz4jk72qHel2iRxWnADWLSft4FRXWS5HzJagwRYTKaD/lDgiO5TtUaY55TRUzu8ZoB+9 iOufXHZw2THcZNOillSewpeMd3LzbolvLI4l1vGwtTLx+ZK0nn2/YmIBWhyLWKHSF7HRbQyW /Q1sTeZmis5wfIqhASYNBAMaBW0= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 198.61.254.9 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyJiZjI2MiIsICJuZXRkZXZAdmdlci5rZXJuZWwub3JnIiwgImJlOWU0YSJd Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n05.prod.us-east-1.postgun.com with SMTP id 6082473f03cfff3452186585 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:04:15 GMT Sender: subashab=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 92A37C4338A; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:04:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: subashab) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0901C433F1; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:04:13 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 22:04:13 -0600 From: subashab@codeaurora.org To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Alex Elder , Sean Tranchetti , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniele Palmas , Aleksander Morgado , Loic Poulain Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: qualcomm: rmnet: Allow partial updates of IFLA_FLAGS In-Reply-To: <20210423023026.GD1908499@yoga> References: <20210422182045.1040966-1-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> <76db0c51-15be-2d27-00a7-c9f8dc234816@linaro.org> <89526b9845cc86143da2221fc2445557@codeaurora.org> <20210423023026.GD1908499@yoga> Message-ID: <7291b240853fbf1fc6dbdc30fe4f6743@codeaurora.org> X-Sender: subashab@codeaurora.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.9 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org > I recently posted a patch to iproute2 extending the rmnet link handling > to handle IFLA_RMNET_FLAGS, in the discussion that followed this > subject > came up. So nothing is broken, it's just that the current logic doesn't > make sense and I wanted to attempt to fix it before we start to use it > commonly distributed userspace software (iproute2, libqmi etc) With this patch, passing IFLA_RMNET_FLAGS in newlink vs changelink will have different behavior. Is that inline with your expectations. I checked VLAN and it seems to be using the same behavior for both the operations. While the patch itself is fine, I don't think its right to have different behavior for the operations. > Okay, please let me know what hoops you want me to jump through. I just > want the subject concluded so that I can respin my iproute2 patch > according to what we decide here. My suggestion is to have the subject prefix as [PATCH net-next] since this is an enhancement rather than fixing something which is broken.