netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] bonding: add netlink attributes to slave link dev

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 21 Jan 2014 13:36:58 -0800
From:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...hat.com>,
	Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] bonding: add netlink attributes to slave link dev


On Jan 21, 2014, at 5:34 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:

>> +	if (rtnl_bond_slave_fill(skb, dev))
>> +		goto nla_put_failure;
>> +
> 
> I must say I do not like this at all. This should be done in a generic
> way. By a callback registered by bonding and possibly other master-slave
> device types.

The bond was registered with the ndo_get_slave op.  ndo_get_slave could be used for other master-slave device types.  I’ll agree that rtnl_bond_slave_fill() could have been written more generically.  Is that the objection?

> I have something in mind, will try to prepare patch soon.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html