[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z-7N60DKIDLS2GXe@mini-arch>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2025 11:05:31 -0700
From: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>
To: Ivan Abramov <i.abramov@...integration.ru>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
syzbot+1df6ffa7a6274ae264db@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
Ahmed Zaki <ahmed.zaki@...el.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: Avoid calling WARN_ON() on -ENOMEM in
netif_change_net_namespace()
On 04/03, Ivan Abramov wrote:
> It's pointless to call WARN_ON() in case of an allocation failure in
> device_rename(), since it only leads to useless splats caused by deliberate
> fault injections, so avoid it.
What if this happens in a non-fault injection environment? Suppose
the user shows up and says that he's having an issue with device
changing its name after netns change. There will be no way to diagnose
it, right?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists