netdev - Re: gre: minor cleanups in netlink interface

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:39:36 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: gre: minor cleanups in netlink interface

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 04:45:48PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Its actually also what defines the difference between using
>> NLM_F_REPLACE (ip link replace) and no flags (ip link change).
>> The former replaces the replaces the object, the later changes
>> an existing object.
> 
> That wasn't the case historically.  For routing NLM_F_REPLACE
> had a real meaning because you can have routes that differ only
> by scope.  So if you considered routes that are otherwise the
> same to be duplicate routes, then NLM_F_REPLACE tells you whether
> you're allowed to create a new route or you must modify one
> of the existing ones.  Of course completely duplicate routes
> where everything is equal is not allowed.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that.

> Of course NLM_F_REPLACE has since been seconded for other purposes
> so I suppose it can mean whatever you want for rtnl link :)

It actually not supported currently because replacement of links
(while keeping routes etc.) would be highly complicated.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html