On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 16:23 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote:
> Sure, but seems I need to ask again: What is the exact reason not to implement
> the muticast message multiplexing/subscription part of the connector as a
> generic part of netlink? That would be nice to have and useful for other
> subsystems too as an option to the current broadcast.
I do not understamd, what is netlink multicast and how it differs from
the
existing behaviour?
Netlink message can be delivered only if someone listens for it.
Subscription part of connector is similar to existing group mechanims,
it is moved a bit higher from do_one_broadcast(),
since it is required for proper high-layer protocol and
it's users do not care about netlink groups, but only it's
own ID's, which can be different.
> Thanks,
> Kay
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- From: Ian Campbell <[email protected]>
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- From: Kay Sievers <[email protected]>
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- From: Kay Sievers <[email protected]>
- Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/6] freepgt2: sys_mincore ignore FIRST_USER_PGD_NR
- Next by Date: Re: crash in entry.S restore_all, 2.6.12-rc2, x86, PAGEALLOC
- Previous by thread: Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- Next by thread: Re: [Fwd: Re: connector is missing in 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
- Index(es):
 |