From: Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>
To: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] Ease nsid allocation
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 18:19:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191003161940.GA31862@linux.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <30d50c1d-d4c8-f339-816b-eb28ec4c0154@6wind.com>
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 10:46:03AM +0200, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 02/10/2019 à 03:20, David Miller a écrit :
> > From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
> > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 18:02:12 +0200
> >
> >> The goal of the series is to ease nsid allocation from userland.
> >> The first patch is a preparation work and the second enables to receive the
> >> new nsid in the answer to RTM_NEWNSID.
> >
> > The new reply message could break existing apps.
> >
> > If an app only performs netnsid operations, and fills up the receive
> > queue because it isn't reading these new replies (it had no reason to,
> > they didn't exist previously), operations will start failing that
> > would not fail previously because the receive queue is full.
> Yes I see the problem. I was wondering if this was acceptable because the nl ack
> is sent at the end. But nl ack are optional :/
>
> >
> > Given this, I don't see how we can make the change.
> >
> Is a new flag attribute ok to turn on this reply?
>
Why not using the existing NLM_F_ECHO mechanism?
IIUC, if rtnl_net_notifyid() did pass the proper nlmsghdr and portid to
rtnl_notify(), the later would automatically notify the caller with
updated information if the original request had the NLM_F_ECHO flag.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-03 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-30 16:02 [PATCH net-next 0/2] Ease nsid allocation Nicolas Dichtel
2019-09-30 16:02 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] netns: move rtnl_net_get_size() and rtnl_net_fill() Nicolas Dichtel
2019-09-30 16:02 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] netns/rtnl: return the new nsid to the user Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-02 1:20 ` [PATCH net-next 0/2] Ease nsid allocation David Miller
2019-10-02 8:46 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-02 14:58 ` David Miller
2019-10-03 16:19 ` Guillaume Nault [this message]
2019-10-04 15:45 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-08 23:00 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-07 11:58 ` [PATCH net] netns: fix NLM_F_ECHO mechanism for RTM_NEWNSID Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-08 23:10 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-09 8:07 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-09 13:48 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-09 9:19 ` [PATCH net v2] " Nicolas Dichtel
2019-10-09 13:48 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-10-10 4:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191003161940.GA31862@linux.home \
--to=gnault@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).