Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink

[David Miller]

From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:10:29 +0400

> On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:37:36PM -0700, Mike Anderson (andmike@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > > > --- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h	2007-07-11 21:37:31.000000000 +0100
> > > > +++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h	2007-07-11 21:37:50.000000000 +0100
> > > > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
> > > >  #define NETLINK_DNRTMSG		14	/* DECnet routing messages */
> > > >  #define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT	15	/* Kernel messages to userspace */
> > > >  #define NETLINK_GENERIC		16
> > > > -/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */
> > > > +#define NETLINK_DM		17	/* Device Mapper */
> > > >  #define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT	18	/* SCSI Transports */
> > > >  #define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS	19
> > > 
> > > Have the net guys checked this?  
> > 
> > No. The support is a derivative of the netlink support in
> > scsi_transport_iscsi.c.
> 
> I'm not sure about all net guys, but the first question rised after
> reading this - why do you want special netlink family and do not want to
> use interfaces created on top of - like connector and genetlink?

I agree, there is really no reason to not at least use
genetlink.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/