[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 18:23:25 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Sam Kumar <samanthakumar@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] udp: support SO_PEEK_OFFSET
On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 5:49 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2016 19:29:49 -0400
>
>> From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
>>
>> Support peeking at a non-zero offset for UDP sockets. Match the
>> existing behavior on Unix datagram sockets.
>>
>> 1/4 makes the sk_peek_offset functions safe to use outside locks
>> 2/4 removes udp headers before enqueue, to simplify offset arithmetic
>> 3/4 introduces SO_PEEK_OFFSET support
>> 4/4 moves sk->sk_peek_off on read, to match Unix socket semantics.
>
> I don't see how you can separate patches #3 and #4.
>
> Once you hook up the socket operation, the user can successfully use
> the feature and therefore must receive the full set of semantics.
Okay, I'll squash the two patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists