Re: [Patch 8/9] generic netlink utility functions

On Sun, 2006-26-03 at 22:14 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:

> Jamal,
> 
> Does the implementation of these utilities look ok? We use genlmsg_data()
> in the delay accounting code but not genlmsg_len(), hence it might not
> be very well tested (just reviewed).
> 

They look fine to me - please resubmit and CC Thomas Graf in case he
sees it different.

cheers,
jamal

-
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/

---

• References:
  • [Patch 0/9] Per-task delay accounting
    • From: Shailabh Nagar <[email protected]>
  • [Patch 8/9] generic netlink utility functions
    • From: Shailabh Nagar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [Patch 8/9] generic netlink utility functions
    • From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [2.6 patch] drivers_mtd_maps_vmax301.c: fix off by one vmax_mtd
• Next by Date: Re: eCryptfs Design Document
• Previous by thread: Re: [Patch 8/9] generic netlink utility functions
• Next by thread: [Patch 9/9] Generic netlink interface for delay accounting
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]