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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 22 May 2013 09:13:36 +0300
From:	Andy Johnson <johnsonzjo@...il.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Rtnelink and notifcations: a question.

Hello,

This is a theoretical question (sorry,-)). I was wondering why do we
need both rtnetlink
kernel sockets and the notification API ?
For example,
in net/core/dev.c,
we use notification to send NETDEV_REGISTER event notification in:
call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_REGISTER, dev);
and we use the rtnetlink to send RTM_NEWLINK message:
rtmsg_ifinfo(RTM_NEWLINK,...);


Is it possible to use only the rtnetlink API and to send events like
NETDEV_REGISTER with rtnetlink methods ?

Or is there something inherent with rtnetlink/notification that
prevents implementing in
this way ?

I believe that the other way (solely using notification API) is not
possible because
we need to support getting messages
from userspace (for example, with the iproute package).



Regards,
Andy
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ