[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4688F612.1060408@trash.net>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 14:56:50 +0200
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
CC: hadi@...erus.ca, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-acpi@...r" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, lenb@...nel.org,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH] [-mm] ACPI: export ACPI events via netlink
Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-06-30 at 11:32 -0400, jamal wrote:
>
>
>>>+ NLA_PUT_U32(skb, CTRL_ATTR_MCAST_GRP_ID, grp->id);
>>>+ NLA_PUT_STRING(skb, CTRL_ATTR_MCAST_GRP_NAME,
>>>+ grp->name);
>>>+
>>
>>Consider my earlier suggestion to use CTRL_ATTR_MCAST_GRP which has both
>>id and name in one struct.
>
>
> Yeah I thought about that but then saw Patrick's patches to convert
> other things away from structs so I wasn't sure what the idea here is.
> Patrick, care to comment?
For information that belongs together logically a struct is fine.
The main reason to use nested attributes is when you only have a
single attribute to store your data in (for example TCA_OPTIONS
for qdiscs). In that case a nested attribute should be used to
allow to extend it in the future. Below that nested attribute
you could put a struct of course.
In this case I think using a string attribute instead of a fixed
sized structure also makes sense for a different reason. Its
unlikely that groups will really use the maximum name length
allowed, so it should save some bandwidth.
-
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists