Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] rename RTNH_F_EXTERNAL to RTNH_F_OFFLOAD

From: roopa <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 06:38:02 -0700

On 5/13/15, 1:26 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 05/13/2015 07:42 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Wed, May 13, 2015 at 07:27:10AM CEST, [email-masked] wrote:
>>> From: Roopa Prabhu <[email-masked]>
>>>
>>> RTNH_F_EXTERNAL today is printed as "offload" in iproute2 output.
>>>
>>> This patch renames the flag to be consistent with what the user sees.
>>>
>>> (I will post iproute2 patch if this gets accepted)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Roopa Prabhu <[email-masked]>
>>> ---
>>> include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h |    2 +-
>>> net/ipv4/fib_trie.c            |    2 +-
>>> net/switchdev/switchdev.c      |    6 +++---
>>> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h 
>>> b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> index 974db03..17fb02f 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ struct rtnexthop {
>>> #define RTNH_F_DEAD        1    /* Nexthop is dead (used by 
>>> multipath)    */
>>> #define RTNH_F_PERVASIVE    2    /* Do recursive gateway lookup    */
>>> #define RTNH_F_ONLINK        4    /* Gateway is forced on link    */
>>> -#define RTNH_F_EXTERNAL        8    /* Route installed 
>>> externally    */
>>> +#define RTNH_F_OFFLOAD        8    /* offloaded route */
>>
>> Since this is part of uapi, I believe this is not doable :/
i thought it was not too late :) and besides i wasn't changing the value 
and just the name.
current iproute2 would still build for example.
>
> You could still alias it if necessary:
>
>   #define RTNH_F_OFFLOAD    RTNH_F_EXTERNAL
that is an option. hmm...wondering if it is worth creating an alias or 
we should live with it.
If i get more votes, i will resubmit.

thanks!.