netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Improve behaviour of Netlink Sockets

To: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve behaviour of Netlink Sockets
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 27 Sep 2004 08:59:05 -0400
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, pablo@xxxxxxxxxxx, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040924220651.GA6096@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: jamalopolous
References: <4150E7E5.2000001@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20040922045239.GA19573@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1095854920.1047.64.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040922105221.59a67d4b.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4152EE68.4030803@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20040923121651.51a58cf2.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040924032830.GC6384@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040923223909.6f4da27f.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040924062604.GA7393@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040924105855.0e1aecd0.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040924220651.GA6096@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 18:06, Herbert Xu wrote:

> I agree completely.  I'm just saying that the current NLM_GOODSIZE
> skb is the perfect scratch-pad so we don't need a new one.  All we
> need to do is to insert a helper call just before netlink_unicast
> to copy and trim the packet in the places that need it.

You are probably talking past each other - to me you seem to be saying
the same thing. A "manager" of some form is required.

cheers,
jamal



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>