On Mon, 2025-04-07 at 15:53 +0300, Ivan Abramov wrote: > Currently, the return value of device_rename() is not acted upon. > > To avoid an inconsistent state in case of failure, roll back the changes > made before the device_rename() call. This kind of seems complicated for something that ought to not happen ... And also (+netdev), what do we do in case this is called from cfg80211_pernet_exit() - leak the whole network namespace because we couldn't allocate memory for the name? That seems counterproductive. I'm really not convinced of this whole patchset. johannes
