On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 02:06 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Same way as the current RTM_SETLINK message works, but with creating > a new link in advance. It works fine in other subsystems, so I don't > see why it would in this case as well. Some subsystems do it in an > atomic fashion (network schedulers for example), some first create > the object, then configure it (network classifiers in the non-compat > cases). In the network device case I suppose the later should work > fine since a device needs to be set UP in a second action before > it really does anything. Looking at br_netlink.c it seems that this sort of contradicts why generic netlink was done, now all the sudden everything that wants to create new links need its own netlink protocol number, no? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
