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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	04 Oct 2007 13:51:47 +0200
From:	Urs Thuermann <urs@...ogud.escape.de>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Oliver Hartkopp <oliver@...tkopp.net>,
	Oliver Hartkopp <oliver.hartkopp@...kswagen.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] CAN: Add PF_CAN core module

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net> writes:

> > +struct sockaddr_can {
> > +	sa_family_t can_family;
> > +	int         can_ifindex;
> > +	union {
> > +		struct { canid_t rx_id, tx_id; } tp16;
> > +		struct { canid_t rx_id, tx_id; } tp20;
> > +		struct { canid_t rx_id, tx_id; } mcnet;
> > +		struct { canid_t rx_id, tx_id; } isotp;
> > +	} can_addr;
> 
> Again being curious, what is the value of this union of all its members
> have the same definition? Backward source code compatibility?

As Oliver already wrote, different CAN transport protocols may use
different sockaddr structures.  Therefore, we have made can_addr a
union.  The four we have defined already, all look the same, but
other, future protocols may define a different structure.

> > +struct can_proto {
> > +	int              type;
> > +	int              protocol;
> > +	int              capability;
> > +	struct proto_ops *ops;
> > +	struct proto     *prot;
> > +};
> > +
> > +/* function prototypes for the CAN networklayer core (af_can.c) */
> > +
> > +extern int  can_proto_register(struct can_proto *cp);
> > +extern void can_proto_unregister(struct can_proto *cp);
> 
> We have proto registering infrastructure for bluetooth, inet and now
> CAN, have you looked at:
> 
> struct inet_protosw;
> proto_{register,unregister}, etc?

Yes, I know inet_protosw and inet_{,un}register_protosw().  But we
can't use inet_register_protosw().

And can_proto_register() does use proto_register().  What exactly do
you want to suggest?

urs
-
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