netdev - Re: [patch net-next rfc 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and delete alternative ifnames

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <52dd953a-d0c7-0086-5faa-18134f033c0b@gmail.com>
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.