From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow setting mtu and txqlen via RTM_SETLINK and provide txqlen via RTM_GETLINK Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:15:07 +0200 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20040824181507.GK21296@postel.suug.ch> References: <20040824094952.GF21073@postel.suug.ch> <20040824120442.GA21296@postel.suug.ch> <20040824103205.1ea9c999.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, hadi@cyberus.ca, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040824103205.1ea9c999.davem@redhat.com> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * David S. Miller <20040824103205.1ea9c999.davem@redhat.com> 2004-08-24 10:32 > On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:04:42 +0200 > Thomas Graf wrote: > > > * Herbert Xu 2004-08-24 20:16 > > > Please think about the meaning of the value. Is anyone going to have a queue > > > bigger than 2^32? > > > > > > And if the answer is yes, then please use u64. > > > > Can you please explain the actual reason for using a fixed width > > type when all existing numeric attributes use arch depedent types? > > Because otherwise things will break and explode for 32-bit > binaries running on 64-bit kernels, which is the situation > for the majority of userland on some platforms. > Also, we eventually want to be able to transmit netlink > messages over real networks to remote clients. Which would be no problem as the size of the attribute is available to userspace. > Therefore, like any other real network protocol, we should > use fixed sized types in the data. I'm fine with that, as long as it's done the same way for all attributes.