[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:51:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: g.nault@...halink.fr
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, milon@...cz,
mkubecek@...e.cz, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] ip: fix creation flags reported in
RTM_NEWROUTE events
From: Guillaume Nault <g.nault@...halink.fr>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 17:18:50 +0200
> Netlink messages sent to user-space upon RTM_NEWROUTE events have their
> nlmsg_flags field inconsistently set. While the NLM_F_REPLACE and
> NLM_F_APPEND bits are correctly handled, NLM_F_CREATE and NLM_F_EXCL
> are always 0.
>
> This series sets the NLM_F_CREATE and NLM_F_EXCL bits when applicable,
> for IPv4 and IPv6.
>
> Since IPv6 ignores the NLM_F_APPEND flags in requests, this flag isn't
> reported in RTM_NEWROUTE IPv6 events. This keeps IPv6 internal
> consistency (same flag semantic for user requests and kernel events) at
> the cost of bringing different flag interpretation for IPv4 and IPv6.
I'm applying this series to net-next so that it has time to cook and
expose anything in userland that might break due to these changes.
I briefly considered applying this to net but I think that is
premature at least for the time being.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists