netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2 5/6] man8/bridge.8: explain self vs master for "bridge fdb add"

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: <20210215121342.driolhmaow7ads5g@skbuf>
Date:   Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:13:42 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
        DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
        Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2 5/6] man8/bridge.8: explain self vs master for
 "bridge fdb add"

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:53:42AM +0100, Alexandra Winter wrote:
> Actually, I found your first (more verbose) proposal more helpful.

Sorry, I don't understand. Do you want me to copy the whole explanation
from bridge fdb add to bridge link set?

> >> Maybe I misunderstand this sentence, but I can do a 'bridge fdb add' without 'self'
> >> on the bridge device. And the address shows up under 'bridge fdb show'.
> >> So what does mandatory mean here?
> >
> > It's right in the next sentence:
> >
> >> The flag is set by default if "master" is not specified.
> >
> > It's mandatory and implicit if "master" is not specified, ergo 'bridge
> > fdb add dev br0' will work because 'master' is not specified (it is
> > implicitly 'bridge fdb add dev br0 self'. But 'bridge fdb add dev br0
> > master' will fail, because the 'self' flag is no longer implicit (since
> > 'master' was specified) but mandatory and absent.
> >
> > I'm not sure what I can do to improve this.
> >
> Maybe the sentence under 'master':
> " If the specified
> +device is a master itself, such as a bridge, this flag is invalid."
> is sufficient to defien this situation. And no need to explain mandatory implicit defaults
> in the first paragraph?

I don't understand this either. Could you paste here how you think this
paragraph should read?