On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 12:53 -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: James Bottomley <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 12:32:42 -0500
>
> > FIB has taken your netlink number, so I changed it to 32
>
> MAX_LINKS is 32, so there is no way this reassignment would
> work.
Actually, I saw this and increased MAX_LINKS as well. I was going to
query all of this on the net-dev mailing list if we'd managed to get the
code compileable.
> You have to pick something in the range 0 --> 32, and as is
> no surprise, there are no numbers available :-)
>
> Since ethertap has been deleted, 16-->31 could be made allocatable
> once more, but I simply do not want to do that and have the flood
> gates open up for folks allocating random netlink numbers.
>
> Instead, we need to take one of those netlink numbers, and turn
> it into a multiplexable layer that can support an arbitrary
> number of sub-netlink types. Said protocol would need some
> shim header that just says the "sub-netlink" protocol number,
> something as simple as just a "u32", this gets pulled off the
> front of the netlink packet and then it's passed on down to the
> real protocol.
I'll let the iSCSI people try this ...
Alternatively, if they don't fancy it, I think the kobject_uevent
mechanism (which already has a netlink number) looks like it might be
amenable for use for most of the things they want to do.
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |