[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTik9+zA4PPPx=q6CRM-sgOjjECJdtJTgkCG9pGAY@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 08:41:48 +1000
From: Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@...il.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
tgraf@...g.ch
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] genetlink: introduce pre_doit/post_doit hooks
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 07:10, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>
>
> Each family may have some amount of boilerplate
> locking code that applies to most, or even all,
> commands.
>
> This allows a family to handle such things in
> a more generic way, by allowing it to
> a) include private flags in each operation
> b) specify a pre_doit hook that is called,
> before an operation's doit() callback and
> may return an error directly,
> c) specify a post_doit hook that can undo
> locking or similar things done by pre_doit,
> and finally
> d) include two private pointers in each info
> struct passed between all these operations
> including doit(). (It's two because I'll
> need two in nl80211 -- can be extended.)
Stupid question:
Why not have a priv struct rather than an arbitrary array of two pointers?
Thanks,
--
Julian Calaby
Email: julian.calaby@...il.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
.Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/
--
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