From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH] 1 Wire drivers illegally overload NETLINK_NFLOG Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 05:52:47 +0200 Message-ID: <42E1BF0F.40303@trash.net> References: <20050723125427.GA11177@rama> <20050722.230559.123762041.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, laforge@netfilter.org, netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org In-Reply-To: <20050722.230559.123762041.yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / $B5HF#1QL@ wrote: > In article <20050723125427.GA11177@rama> (at Sat, 23 Jul 2005 08:54:27 -0400), Harald Welte says: > > >>--- a/include/linux/netlink.h >>+++ b/include/linux/netlink.h >>@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ >> #define NETLINK_IP6_FW 13 >> #define NETLINK_DNRTMSG 14 /* DECnet routing messages */ >> #define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace */ >>-#define NETLINK_TAPBASE 16 /* 16 to 31 are ethertap */ >>+#define NETLINK_W1 16 /* 16 to 31 are ethertap */ >> >> #define MAX_LINKS 32 >> > > Comment says that 16-31 are used for ethertap. > So, probably assigh NETLINK_W1 at 32, and bump MAX_LINKS? ethertap recently got removed, so reusing these values should be fine. Regards Patrick