On Wed, 2020-09-30 at 12:01 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 20:36:24 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-09-30 at 09:44 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >
> > > I started with a get_policy() callback, but I didn't like it much.
> > > Static data is much more pleasant for a client of the API IMHO.
> >
> > Yeah, true.
> >
> > > What do you think about "ops light"? Insufficiently flexible?
> >
> > TBH, I'm not really sure how you'd do it?
>
> There are very few users who actually access ops, I was thinking that
> callers to genl_get_cmd() should declare a full struct genl_ops on the
> stack (or in some context, not sure yet), and then genl_get_cmd() will
> fill it in.
>
> If family has full ops it will do a memcpy(); if the ops are "light" it
> can assign the right pointers.
>
> Plus it can propagate the policy and maxattr from family if needed in
> both cases.
Oh, so you were thinking you'd have to sort of decide on the *family*
level whether you want "light" or "heavy" ops?
Hm. I guess you could even have both?
struct genl_ops *ops;
struct genl_ops_ext *extops;
and then search both arrays, no need for memcpy/pointer assignment?
johannes
