From: Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>
To: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] Ease nsid allocation
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 18:19:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191003161940.GA31862@linux.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <30d50c1d-d4c8-f339-816b-eb28ec4c0154@6wind.com>
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 10:46:03AM +0200, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 02/10/2019 à 03:20, David Miller a écrit :
> > From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
> > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 18:02:12 +0200
> >
> >> The goal of the series is to ease nsid allocation from userland.
> >> The first patch is a preparation work and the second enables to receive the
> >> new nsid in the answer to RTM_NEWNSID.
> >
> > The new reply message could break existing apps.
> >
> > If an app only performs netnsid operations, and fills up the receive
> > queue because it isn't reading these new replies (it had no reason to,
> > they didn't exist previously), operations will start failing that
> > would not fail previously because the receive queue is full.
> Yes I see the problem. I was wondering if this was acceptable because the nl ack
> is sent at the end. But nl ack are optional :/
>
> >
> > Given this, I don't see how we can make the change.
> >
> Is a new flag attribute ok to turn on this reply?
>
Why not using the existing NLM_F_ECHO mechanism?
IIUC, if rtnl_net_notifyid() did pass the proper nlmsghdr and portid to
rtnl_notify(), the later would automatically notify the caller with
updated information if the original request had the NLM_F_ECHO flag.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-03 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-30 16:02 [PATCH net-next 0/2] Ease nsid allocation Nicolas Dichtel
2019-09-30 16:02 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] netns: move rtnl_net_get_size() and rtnl_net_fill() Nicolas Dichtel
2019-09-30 16:02 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] netns/rtnl: return the new nsid to the user Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-02 1:20 ` [PATCH net-next 0/2] Ease nsid allocation David Miller
2019-10-02 8:46 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-02 14:58 ` David Miller
2019-10-03 16:19 ` Guillaume Nault [this message]
2019-10-04 15:45 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-08 23:00 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-07 11:58 ` [PATCH net] netns: fix NLM_F_ECHO mechanism for RTM_NEWNSID Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-08 23:10 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-09 8:07 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-09 13:48 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-09 9:19 ` [PATCH net v2] " Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-09 13:48 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-10 4:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
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=20191003161940.GA31862@linux.home \
--to=gnault@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
/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.