Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables

To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target)
From:	jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	22 Oct 2004 08:19:54 -0400
Cc:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, lmb@xxxxxxx, ahu@xxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to:	<20041022113939.GA812@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization:	jamalopolous
References:	<E1CKkWZ-0005x5-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1098444579.1112.66.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041022113939.GA812@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to:	hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender:	netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 07:39, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2004 at 07:29:39AM -0400, jamal wrote:
> > 
> > Evgeniy Polyakov(aka mr. Sean Paul) posted code a while back for
> > something that uses netlink that he calls  "kernel Konnector". I think
> 
> That patch puts the ID in each message, right?

Yes, the ID is necessary for "routing" the message. Remember this is for
a messaging subsystem so you cant avoid having something that is in the
packet that is used to find where to go next.
I was suggesting also messaging by name.

> That would mean paying the lookup cost for each message rather than
> once when you create the socket.
> 

Take a look at the patch. See how it can be made better.
Evgeniy, Do you have something new to post?

cheers,
jamal

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, (continued) Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, Lars Marowsky-Bree Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, Harald Welte Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, bert hubert Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Herbert Xu Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Thomas Graf Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer, Ben Greear Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Herbert Xu Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), jamal Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), jamal Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Herbert Xu Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), jamal <= Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Evgeniy Polyakov Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), David S. Miller Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Herbert Xu Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), David S. Miller [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, seq_file version, Harald Welte Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, seq_file version, jamal Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, seq_file version, Harald Welte Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, seq_file version, Henrik Nordstrom Re: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target, seq_file version, David S. Miller

Previous by Date:	Re: [PATCH][ATM]: [horizon] eliminate pci_find_device(), chas williams (contractor)
Next by Date:	Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Herbert Xu
Previous by Thread:	Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Herbert Xu
Next by Thread:	Re: Allowing netlink_family to be any integer (was: [PATCH 2.6] iptables CLUSTERIP target), Evgeniy Polyakov
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]