On Thu, 2006-09-02 at 00:02 +0300, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: > I am afraid It is not logical and inconsistent and really breaks > netlink. :-) > > Those nl_pid's are _addresses_ of netlink sockets. You cannot fill them > with random numbers. >
Ok, Alexey: What about the dilemma of when there are no netlink sockets involved? ;-> i.e what is the semantics when there is no netlink socket to map them to, such as in the case of ioctl? This is where the majority of those changes occurred (as well as in the case of the patch you posted). by consistency i mean this: a) if user-app using netlink modifies something, the event will report the nl_pid mapped to its pid or other non-zero value depending on the number of netlink sockets mapped to that process/user-app b) if the same user-app used ioctl instead the reported nl_pid is 0 in the event cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
