| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 30 Mar 2005 21:55:59 -0500 |
| Cc: | Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, Masahide NAKAMURA <nakam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20050330004903.GA3399@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| Organization: | jamalopolous |
| References: | <1111864971.1092.904.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050326194707.GA9872@gondor.apana.org.au> <1111867875.1089.915.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050327081848.GA13428@gondor.apana.org.au> <1111950449.1089.938.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20050330004903.GA3399@gondor.apana.org.au> |
| Reply-to: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Herbert,
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 19:49, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Hi Jamal:
>
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 02:07:29PM -0500, jamal wrote:
> >
> > +/* callback structure passed from either netlink or pfkey */
> > +struct xfrm_sa_cb
> > +{
> > + u32 type; /* the type of caller netlink/pfkey/other */
> > + u32 data; /* callee to caller */
> > + void *hdr;
> > + struct sk_buff *skb;
>
> I don't think we need to carry the original hdr and skb around.
Any objection to still calling it (new name) struct xfrm_sa_cb but
with only one 32 bit value in it - namely data?
This way i could add any other thing in the future in it without
changing the function call paramaters.
cheers,
jamal
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [BK PATCHES] 2.6.x net driver fixes, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events, Herbert Xu |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: IPSEC patch 0 for netlink events, Herbert Xu |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |