Jeff Garzik wrote: >>Do we just cancel out all the counts if we are asked to clear the >>IFF_PROMISC bit? That is definitely wrong, it blows away the entire >>intention of having a count in the first place. Or do we make it act >>as a "decrement 1 count"? That sounds equally lousy to me. >> >>We can't just ignore the request by your very arguments. Right? >> > > Correct. First, a question. Is SIOCSIFFLAGS to be 100% deprecated, or > just the twiddling of IFF_PROMISC bit? > > My preferred way would be to return -EOPNOTSUPP for SIOCSIFFLAGS. The > cases for which this is returned is dependent on the answer to the > question I just asked. So, what is the preferred way of making something promisc/not-promisc if we are not to use SIOCSIFFLAGS? Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
