[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZYAmdSSos_lIjAxH@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 13:01:09 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com,
jhs@...atatu.com, johannes@...solutions.net,
amritha.nambiar@...el.com, sdf@...gle.com, horms@...nel.org,
przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v8 5/9] genetlink: introduce per-sock family
private storage
On Sat, Dec 16, 2023 at 01:29:57PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
>
> Introduce an xarray for Generic netlink family to store per-socket
> private. Initialize this xarray only if family uses per-socket privs.
>
> Introduce genl_sk_priv_get() to get the socket priv pointer for a family
> and initialize it in case it does not exist.
> Introduce __genl_sk_priv_get() to obtain socket priv pointer for a
> family under RCU read lock.
>
> Allow family to specify the priv size, init() and destroy() callbacks.
...
> + void (*sock_priv_init)(void *priv);
Can in some cases init fail? Shouldn't we allow to propagate the error code
and fail the flow?
> + void (*sock_priv_destroy)(void *priv);
...
P.S> I'm fine with either, just consider above as a material to think about.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists