Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:38724 "EHLO mail-wm0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753665AbcFMTZS (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jun 2016 15:25:18 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f48.google.com with SMTP id m124so93215207wme.1 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: NL80211_ATTR_PAD question To: Johannes Berg , Ben Greear , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" References: <575B1964.2030806@candelatech.com> <1465592932.2308.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> From: Arend van Spriel Message-ID: <575F089C.3020201@broadcom.com> (sfid-20160613_212524_217769_6D0403DD) Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 21:25:16 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1465592932.2308.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10-06-16 23:08, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 12:47 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: >> I see this was added sometime recently: NL80211_ATTR_PAD >> >> If another enum member is added, should it replace the PAD enum? > > No. > >> At the least, I think we need some comments about how this is to be >> dealt with. >> > > You simply ignore it :) So do you know why the caller of nla_put_u64_64bit() would need to specify the padattr. I mean, why is this not an generic attribute that netlink deals with internally. It has probably been discussed on the netdev list but I could not find the right thread. Regards, Arend