Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262674AbVDHDfa (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:35:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262666AbVDHDf3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:35:29 -0400 Received: from dea.vocord.ru ([217.67.177.50]:15027 "EHLO vocord.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262679AbVDHDfG (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2005 23:35:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1] From: Evgeniy Polyakov Reply-To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru To: James Morris Cc: Kay Sievers , Ian Campbell , Guillaume Thouvenin , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-bUv5u5iYHHGG9BcThMPL" Organization: MIPT Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 07:41:35 +0400 Message-Id: <1112931695.28858.188.camel@uganda> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-2) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.4 (vocord.com [192.168.0.1]); Fri, 08 Apr 2005 07:34:43 +0400 (MSD) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2004 Lines: 63 --=-bUv5u5iYHHGG9BcThMPL Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 11:47 -0400, James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Kay Sievers wrote: >=20 > > Sure, but seems I need to ask again: What is the exact reason not to im= plement > > the muticast message multiplexing/subscription part of the connector as= a > > generic part of netlink? That would be nice to have and useful for othe= r > > subsystems too as an option to the current broadcast. >=20 > This is a good point, in general, consider generically extending Netlink=20 > itself instead of creating these separate things. I just do not understand, what does netlink multicasting means and how it is different from what we have now. Currently we have group registratin in bind(),=20 and then send data to the bound socket if it has appropriate group. Or should some error be propagated to the caller,=20 if there is no appropriate listener? Connector requires it's own registration technique for 1. hide all transport [netlink] layer from higher protocols which use connector 2. create different group appointment for the given connector's ID [it was different, now new group which is eqal to idx field is appointed to=20 the new callback] 3. provide more generic set of ids >=20 > - James --=20 Evgeniy Polyakov Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski --=-bUv5u5iYHHGG9BcThMPL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCVf1vIKTPhE+8wY0RAsFRAJ4laTyPtLAWTvB9iz+y5Omy2YT3TQCeLdJj +dSDu12MLcVMdkpJBC6eRvw= =3IEa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-bUv5u5iYHHGG9BcThMPL-- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/