[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m21pu14jip.fsf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2025 13:16:46 +0100
From: Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org,
jacob.e.keller@...el.com, yuyanghuang@...gle.com, sdf@...ichev.me,
gnault@...hat.com, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, petrm@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/13] netlink: specs: rt-route: specify
fixed-header at operations level
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> writes:
> The C codegen currently stores the fixed-header as part of family
> info, so it only supports one fixed-header type per spec. Luckily
> all rtm route message have the same fixed header so just move it up
> to the higher level.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> ---
> Documentation/netlink/specs/rt-route.yaml | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/netlink/specs/rt-route.yaml b/Documentation/netlink/specs/rt-route.yaml
> index 292469c7d4b9..6fa3fa24305e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/netlink/specs/rt-route.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/netlink/specs/rt-route.yaml
> @@ -245,12 +245,12 @@ protonum: 0
>
> operations:
> enum-model: directional
> + fixed-header: rtmsg
It's a cleaner spec this way too :)
Reviewed-by: Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists