From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: Netlink Connector / CBUS Date: 05 Apr 2005 06:44:48 -0400 Message-ID: <1112697888.1089.44.camel@jzny.localdomain> References: <1112686480.28858.17.camel@uganda> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Herbert Xu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev , "David S. Miller" , James Morris , rml@novell.com, Greg KH , Andrew Morton Return-path: To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru In-Reply-To: <1112686480.28858.17.camel@uganda> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org To be fair to Evgeniy I am not against the Konnector idea. I think that it is a useful feature to have an easy to use messaging between kernel-kernel and kernel-userspace. The fact that he leveraged netlink instead of inventing things is a bonus. Having said that i have not seriously scrutinized the code - and i think the idea of this new thing hes tossing around called CBUS maybe pushing it. cheers, jamal On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 03:34, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 01:10 -0400, Herbert Xu wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 11:03:16AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > >> > >> I received comments and feature requests from Herbert Xu and Jamal Hadi > >> Salim, > >> almost all were successfully resolved. > > > >Please do not construe my involvement in these threads as endorsement > >for this system. > > Sure. > I remember you are against it :). > > >In fact to this day I still don't understand what problems this thing is > >meant to solve. > > Hmm, what else can I add to my words? > May be checking the size of the code needed to broadcast kobject changes > in kobject_uevent.c for example... > Netlink socket allocation + skb handling against call to cn_netlink_send(). > > >-- > >Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ > >Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} > >Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ > >PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt >