On Fri, 2020-10-02 at 08:25 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > I suppose, I thought you wanted to change it to have separate dump/do > > policies? Whatever you like there, I don't really care much :) > > I just want to make the uAPI future-proof for now.
Yeah, makes sense. > At a quick look ethtool doesn't really accept any attributes but > headers for GET requests. DO and DUMP are the same there so it's > not a priority for me. OK. > > But I can also change my patches later to separately advertise dump/do > > policies, and simply always use the same one for now. > > Right that was what I was thinking. Basically: > > if ((op.doit && nla_put_u32(skb, CTRL_whatever_DO, idx)) || > (op.dumpit && nla_put_u32(skb, CTRL_whatever_DUMP, idx))) > goto nla_put_failure; Right, easy enough. > > But this series does conflict with the little bugfix I also sent, could > > you please take a look? > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20201002094604.480c760e3c47.I7811da1539351a26cd0e5a10b98a8842cfbc1b55@changeid/ > > > > I'm not really sure how to handle. > > Yeah, just noticed that one now :S Yeah, sorry ... The conflicts indeed weren't difficult, but non-trivial unless you know what's going on in each side. I pushed them to my mac80211-next tree, in the genetlink-op-policy-export branch (not sure you saw my patches and cover letter yet :) ) I'll wait for this to get resolved and then respin my patches with the above doit/dumpit after your series is in, and will also respin the userspace side then. johannes
