----- "Herbert Xu" <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 02:19:59PM -0400, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
> >
> > 2) simplicity and reliability: you are downplaying the overhead and
> synchronization necessary (potentially among multiple processes!) to
> simply receive a response, but it is still enormous compared to the
> single syscall case. Even worse, netlink(7) says "netlink is not a
> reliable protocol. ... but may drop messages". Would you accept such
> a mechanism to transfer "write data to file" operations? "Compress
> data using AES" is much more similar to "write data to file" than to
> "change this aspect of kernel routing configuration" - it is an
> application-level service, not a way to communicate long-term
> parameters to a pretty independent subsystem residing in the kernel.
>
> That just shows you have no idea how netlink works.
I'm learning as fast as I can by reading all available documentation :) Nevertheless I believe the point stands even without the reliability problem.
Mirek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
