From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>,
Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
Arkadi Sharshevsky <arkadis@mellanox.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [Question] Should NLMSG_DONE has flag NLM_F_MULTI?
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2022 12:20:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ywb4nCoi24S5iAtx@Laptop-X1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220824183945.6ce7251d@kernel.org>
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 06:39:45PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 11:20:18 +0800 Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > When checking the NLMSG_DONE message in kernel, I saw lot of functions would
> > set NLM_F_MULTI flag. e.g. netlink_dump_done(),
> > devlink_dpipe_{tables, entries, headers}_fill().
> >
> > But from rfc3549[1]:
> >
> > [...] For multipart
> > messages, the first and all following headers have the NLM_F_MULTI
> > Netlink header flag set, except for the last header which has the
> > Netlink header type NLMSG_DONE.
> >
> > What I understand is the last nlmsghdr(NLMSG_DONE message) doesn't need to
> > have NLM_F_MULTI flag. Am I missing something?
> >
> > [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3549.html#section-2.3.2
>
> Looks like you're right, we seem to fairly consistently set it.
> Yet another thing in Netlink we defined and then used differently?
> In practice it likely does not matter, I'd think.
Yes, thanks for the confirmation. I have no plan to change the current
kernel behavior. But for my later patch, I will not add NLM_F_MULTI for
NLMSG_DONE message.
Thanks
Hangbin
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-25 4:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-24 3:20 [Question] Should NLMSG_DONE has flag NLM_F_MULTI? Hangbin Liu
2022-08-25 1:39 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-25 4:20 ` Hangbin Liu [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Ywb4nCoi24S5iAtx@Laptop-X1 \
--to=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
--cc=0x7f454c46@gmail.com \
--cc=arkadis@mellanox.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox