Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Fri, 20 May 2005 07:08:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vocord.com (dea.vocord.ru [217.67.177.50]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id j4KE8VF3030631 for ; Fri, 20 May 2005 07:08:32 -0700 Received: from uganda.factory.vocord.ru (uganda.factory.vocord.ru [192.168.0.48]) by vocord.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j4KE7IH9010340; Fri, 20 May 2005 18:07:18 +0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.12-rc4-mm[12] - ULOG problem From: Evgeniy Polyakov Reply-To: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru To: hadi@cyberus.ca Cc: "David S. Miller" , akpm@osdl.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@oss.sgi.com In-Reply-To: <1116589367.6308.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20050518222729.007887b8.akpm@osdl.org> <1116484313.21310.78.camel@uganda> <20050518234552.4aef6d02.akpm@osdl.org> <20050519.114425.18307286.davem@davemloft.net> <1116571178.21310.124.camel@uganda> <1116589367.6308.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-i2Fx1frPqQmvuSu7WD7T" Organization: MIPT Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 18:15:39 +0400 Message-Id: <1116598539.21310.195.camel@uganda> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-4) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.4 (vocord.com [192.168.0.1]); Fri, 20 May 2005 18:07:21 +0400 (MSD) X-archive-position: 1439 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru Precedence: bulk X-list: netdev Content-Length: 1523 Lines: 52 --=-i2Fx1frPqQmvuSu7WD7T Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 07:42 -0400, jamal wrote: > On Fri, 2005-20-05 at 10:39 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: >=20 > > I just want to note, that if you want message bus, you require > > at least oppsite direction, and thus input callback, and > > either several socket number for each user [kobject, audit, iscsi,=20 > > xfrm - all they implement what connector already does] or > > some header and thus parser in input callback, and thus > > some registration mechanism.=20 >=20 >=20 > But if you are given your own ID, there should no issues, correct? Yes. > i.e it will be no different than say rtnetlink. Users would still have > to subscribe to topics etc, but thats something you already handle. > IOW, Iam hoping you are not resorting to a single socket with some user > space mux to do filtering. Not following, sorry. Userspace should use the same socket as kernel - my application previously obtained it from dmesg and later used ULOG. > cheers, > jamal >=20 --=20 Evgeniy Polyakov Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski --=-i2Fx1frPqQmvuSu7WD7T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCjfELIKTPhE+8wY0RAnJ7AKCExzSpBRYLKXojEcJseiXPPvymmwCdHq5c hH5c9iIcedpGNiJEJ5ZqUCU= =39jJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-i2Fx1frPqQmvuSu7WD7T--