Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: Allow name change of IFF_UP interfaces

2017-08-10 Thread Andrew Lunn
> >> Can you think of any particular real world scenarios which are broken by > >> the change? > > > > How about: > > > > man 8 dhclient-script > > > > The interface name is passed in $interface to the scripts. Do we get > > the old name or the new name? I suspect scripts are going to break if > >

Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: Allow name change of IFF_UP interfaces

2017-08-10 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
Andrew Lunn writes: >> I understand the 'legacy' concern but at the same time we don't want to >> have aftificial limitations too. Name change, in particular, doesn't >> happen 'under the hood' -- someone privileged enough needs to request >> the change. >> >> Can you think of any particular rea

Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: Allow name change of IFF_UP interfaces

2017-08-09 Thread Andrew Lunn
> I understand the 'legacy' concern but at the same time we don't want to > have aftificial limitations too. Name change, in particular, doesn't > happen 'under the hood' -- someone privileged enough needs to request > the change. > > Can you think of any particular real world scenarios which are

Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: Allow name change of IFF_UP interfaces

2017-08-09 Thread Vitaly Kuznetsov
吉藤英明 writes: > 2017-08-09 19:42 GMT+09:00 Vitaly Kuznetsov : >> What happens is: __netvsc_vf_setup() does dev_open() for the VF device and >> the consecutive dev_change_name() fails with -EBUSY because of the >> (dev->flags & IFF_UP) check. The history of this code predates git so I >> wasn't abl

Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: Allow name change of IFF_UP interfaces

2017-08-09 Thread 吉藤英明
2017-08-09 19:42 GMT+09:00 Vitaly Kuznetsov : > What happens is: __netvsc_vf_setup() does dev_open() for the VF device and > the consecutive dev_change_name() fails with -EBUSY because of the > (dev->flags & IFF_UP) check. The history of this code predates git so I > wasn't able to figure out when