From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:36727 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753579AbaJTKw2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Oct 2014 06:52:28 -0400 Message-ID: <1413802344.10246.20.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20141020_125239_773362_610B7B5C) Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Allow to set net namespace for wireless device via RTM_LINK From: Johannes Berg To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: vadim4j@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 12:52:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <128188DF-5A9B-47A5-8A89-974CF7CF9064@holtmann.org> References: <1410467723-2550-1-git-send-email-vadim4j@gmail.com> <1411075535.2034.5.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <20141014121627.GA5115@angus-think.lan> <1413798437.10246.12.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <128188DF-5A9B-47A5-8A89-974CF7CF9064@holtmann.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 12:46 +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Maybe relaxing the check and allow ip link to move a wireless netdev > into a namespace (and having the wiphy follow) could be allowed if it > is the only netdev or the original wlan0 that each wiphy creates. I > really do not know if this is worth it, but for some simpler container > cases it could be beneficial if RTNL can be used instead of having to > go through nl80211. The thought crossed my mind, but 1) it's relatively complex, though by no means impossible 2) it still moves more than you bargained for, since in theory the wiphy could be used to create new interfaces etc. That said, I'm much more inclined to believe such a patch would be worthwhile than the original. johannes From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Allow to set net namespace for wireless device via RTM_LINK Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 12:52:24 +0200 Message-ID: <1413802344.10246.20.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <1410467723-2550-1-git-send-email-vadim4j@gmail.com> <1411075535.2034.5.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <20141014121627.GA5115@angus-think.lan> <1413798437.10246.12.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <128188DF-5A9B-47A5-8A89-974CF7CF9064@holtmann.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: vadim4j-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Marcel Holtmann Return-path: In-Reply-To: <128188DF-5A9B-47A5-8A89-974CF7CF9064-kz+m5ild9QBg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 12:46 +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Maybe relaxing the check and allow ip link to move a wireless netdev > into a namespace (and having the wiphy follow) could be allowed if it > is the only netdev or the original wlan0 that each wiphy creates. I > really do not know if this is worth it, but for some simpler container > cases it could be beneficial if RTNL can be used instead of having to > go through nl80211. The thought crossed my mind, but 1) it's relatively complex, though by no means impossible 2) it still moves more than you bargained for, since in theory the wiphy could be used to create new interfaces etc. That said, I'm much more inclined to believe such a patch would be worthwhile than the original. johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html