Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> For supporting two primitive operation, adding a new netlink address
> family also isn't worthwhile, especially since we're short of netlink
> families.
That's something I'm looking into as well. The current strategy of
either creating a new family or tacking random things into RTNETLINK
is simply not going to scale.
Initially I considered an interface where kernel users can register
themselves using a string as the key. But I soon realised that we
could simply allow the netlink_family field to be an arbitrary integer
that is used as a key to a hash table.
The CPU cost of the hash table isn't too bad since you'll only be
looking it up when the socket is created.
Comments anyone?
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
|