From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCH] genetlink custom attribute type Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:04:34 +0200 Message-ID: <1159265074.2782.13.camel@ux156> References: <1159255520.2782.1.camel@ux156> <20060926094408.GT18349@postel.suug.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem , netdev Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:37310 "EHLO sipsolutions.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751005AbWIZKDt (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Sep 2006 06:03:49 -0400 To: Thomas Graf In-Reply-To: <20060926094408.GT18349@postel.suug.ch> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 11:44 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote: > Thinking it over I'm still not completely happy with this. A > small subset of all the validation tasks is simply too complex > to be put into the policy. The validation of your type value > array is such a case, address fields with variable length based > on their family is another. I think it's just not worth to > blow up struct nla_policy by 12 bytes per entry just to save > some code. Alright, I can instead just add the validation function call wherever that attribute is going to be used. Just thought it might be nice to have this generically, I'm not really too attached to it :) I'll change it in the next nl80211 iteration. johannes