From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: "Kai Lüke" <kailueke@linux.microsoft.com>,
"Paul Chaignon" <paul@cilium.io>,
"Eyal Birger" <eyal.birger@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Revert "xfrm: interface with if_id 0 should return error"
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 08:04:39 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220302080439.2324c5d0@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220301161001.GV1223722@gauss3.secunet.de>
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 17:10:01 +0100 Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > I see this as a very generic question of changing userspace behavior or
> > not, regardless if we know how many users are affected, and from what I
> > know there are similar cases in the kernel where the response was that
> > breaking userspace is a no go - even if the intention was to be helpful
> > by having early errors.
>
> In general I agree that the userspace ABI has to be stable, but
> this never worked. We changed the behaviour from silently broken to
> notify userspace about a misconfiguration.
>
> It is the question what is more annoying for the users. A bug that
> we can never fix, or changing a broken behaviour to something that
> tells you at least why it is not working.
>
> In such a case we should gauge what's the better solution. Here
> I tend to keep it as it is.
Agreed. FWIW would be great if patch #2 started flowing towards Linus'es
tree separately if the discussion on #1 is taking longer.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-02 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-01 13:15 [PATCH 1/2] Revert "xfrm: interface with if_id 0 should return error" kailueke
2022-03-01 13:15 ` [PATCH 2/2] Revert "xfrm: state and policy should fail if XFRMA_IF_ID 0" kailueke
2022-03-01 13:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] Revert "xfrm: interface with if_id 0 should return error" Eyal Birger
2022-03-01 14:17 ` Kai Lüke
2022-03-01 14:34 ` Eyal Birger
2022-03-01 15:09 ` Paul Chaignon
2022-03-01 15:48 ` Kai Lüke
2022-03-01 16:10 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-03-01 16:44 ` Kai Lueke
2022-03-02 9:27 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2022-03-02 16:04 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-03-02 18:11 ` Kai Lueke
2022-03-03 5:33 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-03 7:54 ` Steffen Klassert
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-02-28 18:55 Kai Lüke
2022-02-28 18:51 Kai Lüke
2022-02-28 18:49 Kai Lüke
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220302080439.2324c5d0@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=eyal.birger@gmail.com \
--cc=kailueke@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@cilium.io \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.