Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Chris Wright wrote:
* Ross Kendall Axe (ross.axe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
Taking this idea further, couldn't we split unix_dgram_sendmsg into 2
functions, do_unix_dgram_sendmsg and do_unix_connectionless_sendmsg
(and similarly for unix_stream_sendmsg), then all we'd need is:
<pseudocode>
static int do_unix_dgram_sendmsg(...);
static int do_unix_stream_sendmsg(...);
static int do_unix_connectionless_sendmsg(...);
static int do_unix_connectional_sendmsg(...);
We could probably break it down to better functions and helpers, but I'm
not sure that's quite the breakdown. That looks to me like an indirect
way to pass a flag which is already encoded in the ops and sk_type.
At anyrate, for 2.6.10 the changes should be small and obvious.
Better refactoring should be left for 2.6.11.
Hey, go ahead, do the split and please, please use sk->sk_prot, that is
the way to do the proper split and will allow us to nuke several
pointers in struct sock (sk_slab, sk_owner for now) :-)
I have a friend doing this for X.25, will submit his patches as soon
as we do some more testing and 2.6.10 is out.
Ah, this is the way the inet transport protos have been working for
years, and I've been factoring out the struct proto_ops methods from
TCP into the networking core, look at net/core/stream.c and the
sock_common_ prefixed functions in net/core/sock.c.
- Arnaldo
|