Krzysztof Halasa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
