Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753829AbdHIQKe (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:10:34 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:58546 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752647AbdHIQKc (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2017 12:10:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 18:10:27 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Vitaly Kuznetsov Cc: ???????????? , network dev , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] net: Allow name change of IFF_UP interfaces Message-ID: <20170809161027.GA28694@lunn.ch> References: <20170809104202.30959-1-vkuznets@redhat.com> <87efskye74.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87efskye74.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 564 Lines: 17 > 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 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 they are given the old name, which no longer exists. Andrew