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  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:	Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:33:57 +0200
From:	Tom Gundersen <>
To:	David Herrmann <>
Cc:	Bjørn Mork <>,
	netdev <>,
	LKML <>,
	David Miller <>, Kay Sievers <>,
	dingtianhong <>,
	Tan Xiaojun <>,
	WANG Cong <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/33] net: dummy - set name assign type

On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 12:26 PM, David Herrmann <> wrote:
> Hi
>>> The same goes for NET_NAME_USER and NET_NAME_RENAMED. These are the same
>>> from a kernel point of view.
>> You mean to collapse the two, and just label renamed interfaces
>> NET_NAME_USER instead?
> I have no real objections to merging NAME_USER and NAME_RENAMED. Both
> values imply that there is a user-space authority that applied some
> kind of rules to the naming-scheme. Therefore, anyone reacting to
> those names should better treat them equally and fix the
> naming-authority instead of overwriting it.

I basically agree. There is no strong reason to keep these separate,
so I would not object strongly to merging them.

However, I also don't see any harm in keeping the distinction. If
userspace wants to treat them the same, it easily can. However, if a
usecase appears in the future where the distinction is important, we
can no longer split them apart again. For that reason, I'd slightly
prefer keeping them separate, unless there is a compelling reason not


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists