From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932120AbXGLK1j (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 06:27:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760341AbXGLK13 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 06:27:29 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:48648 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760131AbXGLK13 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2007 06:27:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 03:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20070712.032727.07453420.davem@davemloft.net> To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru Cc: andmike@us.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, agk@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.6.23 PATCH 13/18] dm: netlink From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20070712081028.GB25699@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <20070711142712.e646995b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070711233736.GA29241@us.ibm.com> <20070712081028.GB25699@2ka.mipt.ru> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.1.52 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Evgeniy Polyakov Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:10:29 +0400 > On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:37:36PM -0700, Mike Anderson (andmike@us.ibm.com) wrote: > > > > --- linux.orig/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:31.000000000 +0100 > > > > +++ linux/include/linux/netlink.h 2007-07-11 21:37:50.000000000 +0100 > > > > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ > > > > #define NETLINK_DNRTMSG 14 /* DECnet routing messages */ > > > > #define NETLINK_KOBJECT_UEVENT 15 /* Kernel messages to userspace */ > > > > #define NETLINK_GENERIC 16 > > > > -/* leave room for NETLINK_DM (DM Events) */ > > > > +#define NETLINK_DM 17 /* Device Mapper */ > > > > #define NETLINK_SCSITRANSPORT 18 /* SCSI Transports */ > > > > #define NETLINK_ECRYPTFS 19 > > > > > > Have the net guys checked this? > > > > No. The support is a derivative of the netlink support in > > scsi_transport_iscsi.c. > > I'm not sure about all net guys, but the first question rised after > reading this - why do you want special netlink family and do not want to > use interfaces created on top of - like connector and genetlink? I agree, there is really no reason to not at least use genetlink.