Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/5] rtnetlink: provide permanent hardware address in RTM_NEWLINK | From | David Ahern <> | Date | Tue, 10 Dec 2019 13:27:14 -0700 |
| |
On 12/10/19 1:23 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 21:22 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 09:51 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 14:07:53 +0100 (CET), Michal Kubecek wrote: >>>> @@ -1822,6 +1826,7 @@ static const struct nla_policy ifla_policy[IFLA_MAX+1] = { >>>> [IFLA_PROP_LIST] = { .type = NLA_NESTED }, >>>> [IFLA_ALT_IFNAME] = { .type = NLA_STRING, >>>> .len = ALTIFNAMSIZ - 1 }, >>>> + [IFLA_PERM_ADDRESS] = { .type = NLA_REJECT }, >>>> }; >>>> >>>> static const struct nla_policy ifla_info_policy[IFLA_INFO_MAX+1] = { >>> >>> Jiri, I just noticed ifla_policy didn't get strict_start_type set when >>> ALT_IFNAME was added, should we add it in net? 🤔 >> >> Does it need one? It shouldn't be used with >> nla_parse_nested_deprecated(), and if it's used with nla_parse_nested() >> then it doesn't matter? > > No, wait. I misread, you said "when ALT_IFNAME was added" but somehow I > managed to read "when it was added"... > > So yeah, it should have one. Dunno about net, your call. I'd probably > not bother for an NLA_REJECT attribute, there's little use including it > anyway. >
It's new in net, so it has to be there not net-next.
| |