From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6222458482734355179=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genl: Add l_genl_msg_attr_append_data
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 18:46:37 -0500
Message-ID: <57F590DD.4050102@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1475707520-25740-1-git-send-email-andrew.zaborowski@intel.com>
List-Id: <ell.lists.01.org>
To: ell@lists.01.org

--===============6222458482734355179==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Andrew,

On 10/05/2016 05:45 PM, Andrew Zaborowski wrote:
> Try to minimise the amount of buffers allocated and copied by clients
> when building a message attribute that is a concatenation of other
> buffers, such as an IE sequence.  The client would the following three
> calls:
>
> l_genl_msg_enter_nested
> l_genl_msg_attr_append_data
> l_genl_msg_leave_nested

So the intent here is that instead of:
msg =3D l_genl_msg_new_sized(...);
buf =3D alloca();
// memcpy / scribble in buffer
l_genl_msg_append_attr(msg, NL80211_ATTR_IE, buf_len, buf);

we do something like:
msg =3D l_genl_msg_new_sized(...);
l_genl_msg_enter_nested(msg, NL80211_ATTR_IE);
buf =3D l_genl_msg_attr_append_data(msg, len);
// scribble in buf
buf =3D l_genl_msg_attr_append_data(msg, len);
// scribble in buf
l_genl_msg_leave_nested(msg);

?

If so, you're (very creatively) really abusing the intent of =

enter_nested which is used for true nested attributes.  Don't think I =

really like that...

Is l_genl_msg_append_attrv(msg, iov, iov_len) not sufficient?

Alternatively, we should do something like:

l_genl_msg_attr_open(msg, NL80211_ATTR_IE);
l_genl_msg_attr_reserve(msg, len);
l_genl_msg_attr_append(msg, len, data);
l_genl_msg_attr_reserve(msg, len);
l_genl_msg_attr_close(msg);

Regards,
-Denis

--===============6222458482734355179==--