On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 21:07:36 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote: > > The notification contains the same information as the response to the > > ``CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY`` request. It is most common for "new object" > > notifications to contain the same exact data as the respective ``GET``. > > I might say we should remove that second sentence - this is one of those > murky cases where it's actually sometimes not _possible_ to do due to > message size limitations etc. > > That said, it's still common, so maybe that's OK, "common" doesn't mean > "always" and some notifications might obviously differ even if it's > common. I'll rephrase, I'll just say that in this case it's the same message. > > The socket will now receive notifications. It is recommended to use > > a separate sockets for receiving notifications and sending requests > > to the kernel. The asynchronous nature of notifications means that > > they may get mixed in with the responses making the parsing much > > harder. > > Not sure I'd say "parsing" here, maybe "message handling"? I mean, it's > not really about parsing the messages, more about the potentially > interleaved sequence of handling them. But maybe I'm splitting hairs :) Yup, that's better. Let me revisit this paragraph, it doesn't read too smoothly :S
