From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751100AbWDSRFw (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:05:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750983AbWDSRFv (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:05:51 -0400 Received: from emulex.emulex.com ([138.239.112.1]:27621 "EHLO emulex.emulex.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750967AbWDSRFu (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:05:50 -0400 Message-ID: <44466DE1.4080409@emulex.com> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:05:37 -0400 From: James Smart Reply-To: James.Smart@Emulex.Com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Hemminger CC: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Netlink and user-space buffer pointers References: <1145306661.4151.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060418160121.GA2707@us.ibm.com> <444633B5.5030208@emulex.com> <20060419092645.29cb0420@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20060419092645.29cb0420@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Apr 2006 17:05:37.0676 (UTC) FILETIME=[7AD66CC0:01C663D3] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:57:25 -0400 > James Smart wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> To take netlink to where we want to use it within the SCSI subsystem (as >> the mechanism of choice to replace ioctls), we're going to need to pass >> user-space buffer pointers. > > This changes the design of netlink. It is desired that netlink > can be done remotely over the network as well as queueing. > The current design is message based, not RPC based. By including a > user-space pointer, you are making the message dependent on the > context as it is process. > > Please rethink your design. I assume that the message receiver has some way to determine where the message originated (via the sk_buff), and thus could reject it if it didn't meet the right criteria. True ? You just have to be cognizant that it is usable from a remote entity - which is a very good thing.