[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190719205927.6638187f@cakuba>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:59:27 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
sthemmin@...rosoft.com, dsahern@...il.com, dcbw@...hat.com,
mkubecek@...e.cz, andrew@...n.ch, parav@...lanox.com,
saeedm@...lanox.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next rfc 7/7] net: rtnetlink: add possibility to use
alternative names as message handle
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 13:00:29 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> index 1fa30d514e3f..68ad12a7fc4d 100644
> --- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> +++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> @@ -1793,6 +1793,8 @@ static const struct nla_policy ifla_policy[IFLA_MAX+1] = {
> [IFLA_MAX_MTU] = { .type = NLA_U32 },
> [IFLA_ALT_IFNAME_MOD] = { .type = NLA_STRING,
> .len = ALTIFNAMSIZ - 1 },
> + [IFLA_ALT_IFNAME] = { .type = NLA_STRING,
> + .len = ALTIFNAMSIZ - 1 },
What's the disadvantage of just letting IFLA_IFNAME to get longer
on input? Is it just that the handling would be asymmetrical?
> };
>
> static const struct nla_policy ifla_info_policy[IFLA_INFO_MAX+1] = {
Powered by blists - more mailing lists