[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210226154922.5956512b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 15:49:22 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Alexandru Marginean <alexandru.marginean@....com>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Markus Blöchl <Markus.Bloechl@...tronik.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net 5/6] net: enetc: don't disable VLAN filtering in
IFF_PROMISC mode
On Sat, 27 Feb 2021 01:42:44 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 03:28:36PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > I don't understand what you're fixing tho.
> >
> > Are we trying to establish vlan-filter-on as the expected behavior?
>
> What I'm fixing is unexpected behavior, according to the applicable
> standards I could find. If I don't mark this change as a bug fix but as
> a simple patch, somebody could claim it's a regression, since promiscuity
> used to be enough to see packets with unknown VLANs, and now it no
> longer is...
Can we take it into net-next? What's your feeling on that option?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists