> It does not force the users to use a value < 128. You would need to > return EINVAL for that, which i'm not proposing. Returning an error > could break user space. >
While I understand that clamping avoids breaking user space, silently modifying the value might lead to unexpected behavior that is difficult for users to debug. Because of these side effects, I am hesitant to proceed without the Multicast maintainer's input. We should raise an open issue on this topic to get their official decision, otherwise my preference is to ignore patching this for the stable kernel versions entirely. > By clamping to 127, we don't break user space, but we do avoid the > kernel bug, and at least to my superficial reading of the RFC, we are > "language lawyer" compliant with the RFC. > > Andrew
