On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 7:22 PM Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 02:16:04PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > >From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >commit 65cab850f0eeaa9180bd2e10a231964f33743edf upstream. > > > >While most distributions long ago switched to the iproute2 suite > >of utilities, which allow class-e (240.0.0.0/4) address assignment, > >distributions relying on busybox, toybox and other forms of > >ifconfig cannot assign class-e addresses without this kernel patch. > > > >While CIDR has been obsolete for 2 decades, and a survey of all the > >open source code in the world shows the IN_whatever macros are also > >obsolete... rather than obsolete CIDR from this ioctl entirely, this > >patch merely enables class-e assignment, sanely. > > > >Signed-off-by: Dave Taht <dave.taht@xxxxxxxxx> > >Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Is this really a fix? This isn't something that ever worked. I guess it fits the bill of "a real bug that bothers people", what OpenWrt wants is to use their simple userspace to set up class-e addresses and without this patch, this doesn't work for them, and IIUC it could be expected to work. I guess it is an ontological question whether OpenWrt are "fixning" or "stabilizing" or "adding features" by making class-e networks work with good old ifconfig. The maintainer(s) will decide. > Either way, David Miller will need to sign off on this since he manages > net/ -stable patches. I was unaware of different route points for stable patches, but it makes sense. Maybe we should add some kind of tagging entries to MAINTAINERS so it is clear where to route stable material? Right now I guess it is another one of these undocumented rules that one is supposed to pick up by first annoying everyone :D Are there other subsystems that have a second-level maintainer for stable, so I know before annoying someone else? Yours, Linus Walleij
