lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: RFC: configuring net interfaces
Krzysztof Halasa <khc@intrepid.pm.waw.pl> écrit :
[...]
> But it's still more complicated than the first one and I'm not sure
> if doing that is worth it
>
> > struc sub_req {
> > int sub_ioctl;
>
> ... as we lose 4 bytes here (currently the union of structs in ifreq
> is limited to 16 bytes)

I missed that. Point taken.

[...]
> struct ifreq {
> char name[16];
> union {
> ...
> struct {
> int sub_command;
> int data_length;
> void *data;
> }
> }ifru;
> }
>
> ... while "data" would be fr_protocol, eth_physical etc.
>
> It's (of course) more complicated, but there is a gain:
> - we can have different size requests (from 0 bytes to, say, 100KB)

Fine with me (some day we'll surely end passing those data via a read if we
need 300Mo but we're not there :o) ).

[Other points]

Yes.

--
Ueimor
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:23    [W:0.110 / U:0.460 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site