netdev - Re: [PATCH] 8021q/vlan: process NETDEV_GOING

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <20120530.175020.1714406888633137662.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2012 17:50:20 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eldad@...refinery.com
Cc:	kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 8021q/vlan: process NETDEV_GOING_DOWN

From: Eldad Zack <eldad@...refinery.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 23:47:32 +0200 (CEST)

> 
> On Wed, 30 May 2012, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Eldad Zack <eldad@...refinery.com>
>> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 21:11:02 +0200 (CEST)
>> 
>> > In case a certain protocol needs to send a "dying gasp" packet, when you 
>> > administrativly shutdown the port (which is also what happens when you 
>> > restart the machine).
>> 
>> No in tree users have this requirement, therefore your patch is
>> inappropriate.
> 
> You are right in that, that no in tree users have this requirement 
> (yet), but in the same time it doesn't harm any existing code.
> 
> Don't you agree that it's the right order to do the notifications?

It's not an issue that matters upstream, so I simply do not care.

When you, or someone else, submits code that needs this facility
then we can talk about it.

Otherwise it's just a waste of our time.
--
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