> > Yes, it does seem broken, kind of surprising we haven't seen this very > > often. But instead of introducing a new ipif_need_up field, can't you > > deduce it from the already available information ? > > We already went through ip_sioctl_flags() -> ipif_down() and cleared > IPIF_UP before calling ip_sioctl_flags_restart(), so I don't think there's > enough information left.
I see what you're saying now -- yes, we can simply check the `flags' argument passed into ip_sioctl_flags_tail() and bring the address back up if `flags & IFF_UP'. -- meem
