[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1389096874.2248.7.camel@weing>
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 13:14:34 +0100
From: Thomas Haller <thaller@...hat.com>
To: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
stephen@...workplumber.org, dcbw@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ipv6 addrconf: add IFA_F_NOPREFIXROUTE flag to
suppress creation of IP6 routes
On Tue, 2014-01-07 at 13:01 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 06:29:35PM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
> > @@ -3662,8 +3666,10 @@ static int inet6_addr_modify(struct inet6_ifaddr *ifp, u32 ifa_flags,
> > if (!(ifp->flags&IFA_F_TENTATIVE))
> > ipv6_ifa_notify(0, ifp);
> >
> > - addrconf_prefix_route(&ifp->addr, ifp->prefix_len, ifp->idev->dev,
> > - expires, flags);
> > + if (ifa_flags & IFA_F_NOPREFIXROUTE == 0) {
> > + addrconf_prefix_route(&ifp->addr, ifp->prefix_len, ifp->idev->dev,
> > + expires, flags);
> > + }
>
> Actually, if we switch from IFA_F_NOPREFIXROUTE to !IFA_F_NOPREFIXROUTE we
> have to remove the prefix route, no?
>
> Greetings,
>
> Hannes
>
hi Hannes,
I am about to resent the patch, so that IFA_F_NOPREFIXROUTE is saved in
the flags of the address. Later, when deleting such address, this is
used to indicate ~not~ to delete any prefix route... just as you suggest
in your earlier email (if I understood you right).
About this suggestion now, I tend to "no". Yes, it could be sensible, on
the other hand, if user space already controls the routes (as indicated
by it's use of IFA_F_NOPREFIXROUTES), I would just leave it to the user
to clean up the wrong prefix route.
What do you think?
Thomas
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists