From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
David Ahern <dsa@cumulusnetworks.com>,
Andrey Vagin <avagin@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next iproute2 1/2] libnetlink: Add test for error code returned from netlink reply
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:24:04 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161027082404.GC1867@uranus.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161027065253.GB1867@uranus.lan>
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 09:52:53AM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
...
> >
> > This looks like a mistake in how you implemented the functionality in the kernel.
> > Despite what it looks like, all netlink request/reply functionality reports
> > errors in current implementation by returning error to the sendmsg request.
> >
> > What you added implies that the new kernel api is wrong, or many other usages
> > are wrong. Please fix the kernel.
>
> No. This is not my code. This code has been in kernel for the really long time.
> I don't know why you've not been doing such test in libnetlink before.
>
> Actually I've hit this problem accidentaly -- I made a patch 2 from this
> set and run it on the machine where kernel was unpatched, ie without
> raw-diag module, and I found that we can't figure out if kernel notified
> us that some diag module simply not present in the system. And here is
> the only way to find it out.
Also, drop this series for a while, I'll resend new one: the status of
diag should not be tested unconditionally with NLMSG_DONE because the
rtnl_dump_filter_l helper is used not only for diag talks but overall
the iproute2, thus I need to test for status only for specified requests.
And I need to narrow down why not all device bound interfaces are killed
in one pass.
Cyrill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-27 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-26 19:30 [RFC net-next iproute2 0/2] Add support for operating raw sockest via diag interface Cyrill Gorcunov
2016-10-26 19:30 ` [RFC net-next iproute2 1/2] libnetlink: Add test for error code returned from netlink reply Cyrill Gorcunov
2016-10-27 3:52 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-10-27 6:52 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2016-10-27 8:24 ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2016-10-26 19:30 ` [RFC net-next iproute2 2/2] ss: Add inet raw sockets information gathering via netlink diag interface Cyrill Gorcunov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161027082404.GC1867@uranus.lan \
--to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=avagin@openvz.org \
--cc=dsa@cumulusnetworks.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.