On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 10:12 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 12:13 +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > The main idea was to simplify userspace control and notification > > system - so people did not waste it's time learning how skb's are > > allocated > > and processed, how socket layer is designed and what all those > > netlink_* and NLMSG* mean if they do not need it. > > Isn't connector built on top of netlink? If so, is there any reason for > it to be a new subsystem rather than an extension the the netlink API?
Connector is not netlink API extension in any way.
It uses netlink as transport layer, one can change
cn_netlink_send()/cn_input()
into something like bidirectional ioctl and use it.
Only one cn_netlink_send() function can be "described" as API
extension,
although even it is not entirely true.
Better design explanation can be found in lkml/netdev archives.
> Ian.
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
