[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c20aa306-81a9-f083-25e8-85002063b4cc@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2021 07:35:39 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Rocco Yue <rocco.yue@...iatek.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, rocco.yue@...il.com,
chao.song@...iatek.com, zhuoliang.zhang@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ipv6: add IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU to expose mtu
value in the RA message
On 8/2/21 6:40 AM, Rocco Yue wrote:
> On Sat, 2021-07-31 at 11:17 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 7/30/21 7:52 PM, Rocco Yue wrote:
>
>> IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU set. You can set "reject_message" in the policy to
>> return a message that "IFLA_INET6_RA_MTU can not be set".
>
> Hi David,
>
> Regarding setting "reject_message" in the policy, after reviewing
> the code, I fell that it is unnecessary, because the cost of
> implementing it seems to be a bit high, which requires modifying
> the function interface. The reasons is as follows:
The policy can be setup now to do the right thing once the extack
argument is available.
do_setlink() has an extack argument. It calls validate_linkmsg which
calls validate_link_af meaning support can be added in a single patch.
If you decide to do it, then it should be a separate patch preceding
this one.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists