netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] bridge: remove !IFF_UP restriction when deleting bridge from ioctl

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]

Message-Id: <20140404.110800.1665495271585798396.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 04 Apr 2014 11:08:00 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	dcbw@...hat.com
Cc:	stephen@...workplumber.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] bridge: remove !IFF_UP restriction when deleting
 bridge from ioctl

From: Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 09:56:22 -0500

> netlink doesn't care about IFF_UP when deleting a bridge, so "ip link
> del br0" works just fine.  The ioctl does care, which means that brctl
> complains "bridge br0 still up; can't delete it".  Make things
> consistent by always allowing bridge deletion even if the bridge is up.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>
> ---
> Question: does anyone consider the ioctl behavior API?  Can we change it
> even though it's been this way forever?  It means that bridges that
> previously would not have been deleted by brctl will now be deleted.
> But anyone using /sbin/ip could already delete them.

Unfortunately I think we're stuck with the existing behavior.

And since, as you say, iproute2 always does the removal when
the device is up, the behavior you desire is available.
--
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