Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 13:16:59 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     David Decotigny <ddecotig@google.com>
Cc:     David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
        "Mahesh Bandewar (=?UTF-8?B?4KSu4KS5?=
        =?UTF-8?B?4KWH4KS2IOCkrOCkguCkoeClh+CkteCkvuCksA==?=) " 
        <maheshb@google.com>, David Decotigny <decot+git@google.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
        "Denis V. Lunev" <den@openvz.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@huawei.com>,
        Yuwei Wang <wangyuweihx@gmail.com>,
        Alexander Mikhalitsyn <alexander.mikhalitsyn@virtuozzo.com>,
        Thomas Zeitlhofer <thomas.zeitlhofer+lkml@ze-it.at>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] net: neigh: persist proxy config across link
 flaps
Message-ID: <20221215131659.7410a1da@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAG88wWYA72sij4iaWowLpawzM7tJdYdHCKQnE0bjndGO74vROw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20221213073801.361500-1-decot+git@google.com>
        <20221214204851.2102ba31@kernel.org>
        <CAF2d9jh_O0-uceNq=AP5rqPm9xcn=9y8bVxMD-2EiJ3bD_mZsQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <CAG88wWbZ3eXCFJBZ8mrfvddKiVihF-GfEOYAOmT_7VX_AeOoqQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <20221215110544.7e832e41@kernel.org>
        <CAG88wWYA72sij4iaWowLpawzM7tJdYdHCKQnE0bjndGO74vROw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 12:36:32 -0800 David Decotigny wrote:
> > Makes sense. This is not urgent, tho, right?  
> 
> Not that kind of urgent.
> 
> FTR, in the v2 you suggested to use NUD_PERMANENT,

I think that was Alex. I don't have a strong preference. I could see
arguments being made in both directions (basically whether it's more
important to leave objects which are clearly not cache vs we care 
more about consistent behavior based on the permanent flag itself).

Let's limit the reposts until experts are in town ;)

>  I can try to see how this would look like. Note that this will make
> the patch larger and more intrusive, and with potentially a behavior
> change for whoever uses the netlink API directly instead of the
> iproute2 implementation for ip neigh X proxy things.