Hi,
On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 16:56:43 +0200 Phil Sutter <p...@nwl.cc> wrote:
> > Actual code, since first committed, attempts to parse "index" as 1st
> > argument (without success), see parse_mirred():
> >
> > if (matches(*argv, "egress") == 0 || matches(*argv, "index") == 0) {
> > int ret = parse_egress(a, &argc, &argv, tca_id, n);
>
> Oh, I missed that! But to me this looks like the author wanted to avoid
> erroring out with "mirred option not supported index" in case of missing
> 'egress' keyword.
Could be; Not that it matters much, but evidence in parse_egress() shows
that it DOES try to parse and store "index" EVEN if no "egress" seen YET.
> Yeah, I'd go with least effort approach, i.e. not adding any additional
> flexibility in arg parsing. Since the docs never stated otherwise, I
> don't think it was a real issue for users.
Sure. It never really worked ;)
If we go that way, then some code in parse_direction needs to be
eliminated/restructured; So we'll end up with:
- less code in parse_direction
- not adding any additional flexibility in arg parsing
- bigger diff than suggested
Stephen, Jamal, do you have any preference here?
