public inbox for b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sven Eckelmann <sven@narfation.org>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org,
	Marek Lindner <mareklindner@neomailbox.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] alfred: Allow operating without any interface specified
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 09:54:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1647569.GsyeJrCcj3@sven-l14> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2907656.mQGJSZOrAB@rousseau>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2279 bytes --]

On Sunday, 2 January 2022 20:01:47 CET Marek Lindner wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 January 2022 15:20:20 CET Sven Eckelmann wrote:
> > This now causes the "--force" option (+its storage in the globals data
> > structure) to be completely useless. 
> 
> Why would global->force be useless ? The alfred_server() function still uses 
> the global->force state to determine if globals->mesh_iface is configured 
> correctly.

Ok, you are right about mesh_iface. But the patch missed to adjust the manpage 
to clarify this.

> > I would prefer to have this handling still be there when
> > !list_empty(&globals->interfaces).
> 
> To be honest, I hadn't fully understood what use case global->force is trying 
> to address. What do you have in mind ? Checking for list_empty() will require 
> alfred to be always started with an interface configured while alfred could be 
> used without any interface at all and operate as local data storage between 2 
> processes on the same system or the interface could be configured at a later 
> time (via unix socket).

No, I wasn't talking about list_empty() but about !list_empty(). You removed 
the first block because you want to have have alfred started without any 
interface - fine with that.

But the default behavior of alfred in the past was to first check if the 
selected interfaces make sense and then return an error if there was a problem 
to open them. The force option basically ignored any error when there was an 
interface not ready yet. But the patch completely removed the chance to pre-
check the interfaces on startup.

> > And why is it necessary to not open the sockets on startup when interfaces
> > are already given?
> 
> The main while loop calls netsock_reopen() in each round which will open all 
> necessary sockets (unless I am mistaken). My guess is that this was added when 
> the ALFRED_CHANGE_INTERFACE call was added. Therefore, the netsock_open() call 
> is somewhat redundant unless alfred is meant to always require an interface at 
> startup time and alfred is meant to bail out whenever that configured interface 
> isn't available at startup time.

See above. The situation I had in mind was:

* force not enabled
* an interface given to the process
* interface cannot be used by alfred

Kind regards,
	Sven

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-03  8:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-02 11:30 alfred: runtime configuration Marek Lindner
2022-01-02 11:31 ` [PATCH 1/4] alfred: remove meaningless printf() call Marek Lindner
2022-01-02 11:31   ` [PATCH 2/4] alfred: Allow operating without any interface specified Marek Lindner
2022-01-02 14:20     ` Sven Eckelmann
2022-01-02 19:01       ` Marek Lindner
2022-01-03  8:54         ` Sven Eckelmann [this message]
2022-01-02 11:31   ` [PATCH 3/4] alfred: introduce 'change batman-adv interface' IPC call Marek Lindner
2022-01-02 11:31   ` [PATCH 4/4] alfred: introduce 'server status' " Marek Lindner
2022-01-02 14:43     ` Sven Eckelmann
2022-01-12 21:14       ` Marek Lindner
2022-01-20  8:25         ` Sven Eckelmann
2022-01-03  9:09     ` Sven Eckelmann

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=1647569.GsyeJrCcj3@sven-l14 \
    --to=sven@narfation.org \
    --cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org \
    --cc=mareklindner@neomailbox.ch \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox