On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 09:54:36PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> this series removes the kernel_setsockopt and kernel_getsockopt
> functions, and instead switches their users to small functions that
> implement setting (or in one case getting) a sockopt directly using
> a normal k
From: 'Christoph Hellwig'
> Sent: 21 May 2020 10:12
...
> > I worried about whether getsockopt() should read the entire
> > user buffer first. SCTP needs the some of it often (including a
> > sockaddr_storage in one case), TCP needs it once.
> > However the cost of reading a few words is small, and
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 08:01:33AM +, David Laight wrote:
> How much does this increase the kernel code by?
44 files changed, 660 insertions(+), 843 deletions(-)
> You are also replicating a lot of code making it more
> difficult to maintain.
No, I specifically don't.
> I don't think the
From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 20 May 2020 20:55
>
> this series removes the kernel_setsockopt and kernel_getsockopt
> functions, and instead switches their users to small functions that
> implement setting (or in one case getting) a sockopt directly using
> a normal kernel function call with typ
Hi Dave,
this series removes the kernel_setsockopt and kernel_getsockopt
functions, and instead switches their users to small functions that
implement setting (or in one case getting) a sockopt directly using
a normal kernel function call with type safety and all the other
benefits of not having a
