On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 17:14:12 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > >>> I think we should "just" move ieee80211_verify_mac() into do_open(). >>> Semantically anyway, I'm clearly handwaving a bit. But I would argue >>> that you can set any MAC address that you like, as long as you don't >>> bring the interface up, hence the verification really shouldn't be done >>> when you assign the address but when you bring it up. >> >> I've considered this initially. Two reasons that made me >> think the current approach is cleaner are: >> - it's nice when user gets the error during the action that >> puts system in inconsistent state not some time later. I >> personally hate to get vague EBUSY and have to figure out >> what's wrong. >> - suppose there are two interfaces, both down with >> incompatible addresses. User adds third ifc, what address >> should we assign to it? > > Right now you can assign the same addresses to multiple interfaces and > then you can't bring them up. This happens for example if there are no > more addresses to assign. I didn't realise that. I will move the check into do_open() path as suggested then. -- kuba -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
