Re: bridge(4) shouldn't try to create new interfaces when i make a typo
> On 10 Jul 2020, at 12:45 am, sven falempin wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:31 AM Klemens Nanni wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 05:08:01PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: >>> if i accidentally `ifconfig bridge add gre0` instead of egre0, having >>> bridge create gre0 and then not like it is not what i expect to happen. >>> especially when it leaves me with an extra gre0 interface lying around >>> afterwards. >>> >>> i can appreciate that this was trying to be helpful when you wanted >>> to add virtual interfaces to a bridge on boot, but that was before >>> netstart(8) created all the interfaces with config files up front, before >>> it then goes through and runs the config for them. >> I agree. >> >> OK kn >> > > this will force the use of create beforehand ? the interface you want to add as a bridge port will have to exist before you can add it to a bridge. > or ifconfig bridge0 up will still work ? ifconfig does that, so this diff does not break that. > because script in the wild may not do the create first. scripts may have to be fixed as things change. > > -- > -- > - > Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do >
Re: bridge(4) shouldn't try to create new interfaces when i make a typo
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:31 AM Klemens Nanni wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 05:08:01PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: > > if i accidentally `ifconfig bridge add gre0` instead of egre0, having > > bridge create gre0 and then not like it is not what i expect to happen. > > especially when it leaves me with an extra gre0 interface lying around > > afterwards. > > > > i can appreciate that this was trying to be helpful when you wanted > > to add virtual interfaces to a bridge on boot, but that was before > > netstart(8) created all the interfaces with config files up front, before > > it then goes through and runs the config for them. > I agree. > > OK kn > this will force the use of create beforehand ? or ifconfig bridge0 up will still work ? because script in the wild may not do the create first. -- -- - Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do
Re: bridge(4) shouldn't try to create new interfaces when i make a typo
On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 05:08:01PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: > if i accidentally `ifconfig bridge add gre0` instead of egre0, having > bridge create gre0 and then not like it is not what i expect to happen. > especially when it leaves me with an extra gre0 interface lying around > afterwards. > > i can appreciate that this was trying to be helpful when you wanted > to add virtual interfaces to a bridge on boot, but that was before > netstart(8) created all the interfaces with config files up front, before > it then goes through and runs the config for them. I agree. OK kn
bridge(4) shouldn't try to create new interfaces when i make a typo
if i accidentally `ifconfig bridge add gre0` instead of egre0, having
bridge create gre0 and then not like it is not what i expect to happen.
especially when it leaves me with an extra gre0 interface lying around
afterwards.
i can appreciate that this was trying to be helpful when you wanted
to add virtual interfaces to a bridge on boot, but that was before
netstart(8) created all the interfaces with config files up front, before
it then goes through and runs the config for them.
ok?
Index: if_bridge.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if_bridge.c,v
retrieving revision 1.340
diff -u -p -r1.340 if_bridge.c
--- if_bridge.c 24 Jun 2020 22:03:42 - 1.340
+++ if_bridge.c 9 Jul 2020 07:02:24 -
@@ -273,14 +273,6 @@ bridge_ioctl(struct ifnet *ifp, u_long c
break;
ifs = ifunit(req->ifbr_ifsname);
-
- /* try to create the interface if it does't exist */
- if (ifs == NULL) {
- error = if_clone_create(req->ifbr_ifsname, 0);
- if (error == 0)
- ifs = ifunit(req->ifbr_ifsname);
- }
-
if (ifs == NULL) { /* no such interface */
error = ENOENT;
break;
