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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 18:29:13 -0600 From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>, Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com> Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>, dcbw@...hat.com, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, parav@...lanox.com, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>, mlxsw <mlxsw@...lanox.com> Subject: Re: [patch net-next rfc 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and delete alternative ifnames On 8/12/19 3:43 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Is not adding commands better because it's easier to deal with the > RTM_NEWLINK notification? I must say it's unclear from the thread why > muxing the op through RTM_SETLINK is preferable. IMHO new op is > cleaner, do we have precedent for such IFLA_.*_OP-style attributes? An alternative name for a link is not a primary object; it is only an attribute of a link and links are manipulated through RTM_*LINK commands.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists