On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:43:16AM -0700, Tadeusz Struk wrote: > On 03/19/2015 09:20 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > is completely pointless. Just have sock_read_iter() and sock_write_iter() > > check if your new methods are present and use those if those are. > > > > Ok, that will work for me too. > > > What's more, I'm not at all sure that you want to pass iocb that way - > > kernel-side msghdr isn't tied to userland one anymore, so we might as well > > stash a pointer to iocb into it. Voila - no new methods needed at all. > > Good point, so what do you prefer - to add iocd to msghdr or to call the new > methods from sock_read_iter() and sock_write_iter()? > Either way is good for me. I'd probably add msg_iocb to the end of struct msghdr and explicitly zero it in copy_msghdr_from_user() and get_compat_msghdr(), but you are asking the wrong guy - that sort of choices in net/* falls on davem, not me. -- 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
