From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 05/20] netlink: Add new socket option to enable strict checking on dumps Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 12:43:55 -0600 Message-ID: <336199f4-1afc-f23e-0ccb-183dc0572290@gmail.com> References: <20181004213355.14899-1-dsahern@kernel.org> <20181004213355.14899-6-dsahern@kernel.org> <20181005173628.ewdch6aoaz6vd4qj@brauner.io> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, jbenc@redhat.com, stephen@networkplumber.org To: Christian Brauner , David Ahern Return-path: Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com ([209.85.215.196]:42493 "EHLO mail-pg1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728381AbeJFBn4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2018 21:43:56 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id i4-v6so5090729pgq.9 for ; Fri, 05 Oct 2018 11:43:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20181005173628.ewdch6aoaz6vd4qj@brauner.io> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 10/5/18 11:36 AM, Christian Brauner wrote: >> diff --git a/include/linux/netlink.h b/include/linux/netlink.h >> index 88c8a2d83eb3..36bdca2aa42d 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/netlink.h >> +++ b/include/linux/netlink.h >> @@ -179,6 +179,8 @@ struct netlink_callback { >> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack; >> u16 family; >> u16 min_dump_alloc; >> + unsigned int strict_check:1, >> + unused:31; > > I like this idea a lot. :) but I'm not a fan of bitfields if not > necessary. Is that really necessary here? > no strong opinions on a bitfield vs a bool.