Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@canonical.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Sep 2018 11:32:22 +0200
To:     Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Cc:     Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        ktkhai@virtuozzo.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru,
        yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, pombredanne@nexb.com,
        kstewart@linuxfoundation.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        dsahern@gmail.com, fw@strlen.de, lucien.xin@gmail.com,
        jakub.kicinski@netronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] rtnetlink: add IFA_IF_NETNSID for
 RTM_GETADDR
Message-ID: <20180903093221.bxdqw2iwvxli4dhf@gmail.com>
References: <81379a4f-7149-10ff-2453-886314d0b0c4@virtuozzo.com>
 <20180830144544.tpross4jd6awou4u@gmail.com>
 <ba6a1b18-959e-e307-45fa-e0da9d6f0b0f@6wind.com>
 <20180831.175847.339882322459287210.davem@davemloft.net>
 <20180901184704.lzynbw5zkyiqc6wb@gmail.com>
 <20180902115851.2b224c23@redhat.com>
 <d9efff32-4138-5645-c610-7f2051085d7b@6wind.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <d9efff32-4138-5645-c610-7f2051085d7b@6wind.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 09:50:00AM +0200, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 02/09/2018 à 11:58, Jiri Benc a écrit :
> > On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 20:47:05 +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> >> Sorry for the late reply. Yup, sounds good to me.
> >> But maybe IFA_TARGET_NETNSID to indicate that we're talking network
> >> namespaces here? Seems to me that NSID might give the wrong impression.
> >> I'll send v1 soon. I expect tomorrow or sometime next week.
> > 
> > On the other hand, we currently have IFLA_IF_NETNSID for the link
> > operations. IFA_IF_NETNSID is more consistent with the existing
> > attribute. It may be confusing to authors of user space programs to
> > have attribute names doing the same thing constructed differently for
> > different calls (IFLA_IF_NETNSID and IFA_TARGET_NETNSID).
> Yep, I also thought to this. It had sense because it was the link family.
> What about adding an alias (#define IFLA_TARGET_NETNSID IFLA_IF_NETNSID) in the
> uapi to better document this?

Sounds good to me.