In article <Pine.LNX.4.44.0307171716160.9419-100000@DYN318430.beaverton.ibm.com> (at Thu, 17 Jul 2003 17:37:18 -0700 (PDT)), Krishna Kumar <krkumar@us.ibm.com> says: > > Anyway, it seems we're reaching consensus. > > Great! Glad we have reached consensus because I am exhausted! Since you > have agreed to the above proposal, the prefix list patch has to be applied > before the O/M flags patch. I have kept the RTM_GETLNKINFO and specified > a new option to get the flags information, this can be extended later to > add more options for other paramters. We're reaching consensus, but hot have reached. :-p First part (prefixlist) seems ok to me. Second part does not. > -------- Patch for O/M flags against 2.5.73 (dependent on previous patch ----- > diff -ruN linux-2.5.73.org/include/linux/rtnetlink.h test/linux-2.5.73/include/linux/rtnetlink.h > --- linux-2.5.73.org/include/linux/rtnetlink.h 2003-06-22 11:33:07.000000000 -0700 > +++ test/linux-2.5.73/include/linux/rtnetlink.h 2003-07-17 16:57:52.000000000 -0700 > @@ -47,7 +47,9 @@ > #define RTM_DELTFILTER (RTM_BASE+29) > #define RTM_GETTFILTER (RTM_BASE+30) > > -#define RTM_MAX (RTM_BASE+31) > +#define RTM_GETLNKINFO (RTM_BASE+34) > + > +#define RTM_MAX (RTM_GETLNKINFO+1) > > /* > Generic structure for encapsulation of optional route information. This is what we don't have consensus. We need to decide whether to create new RTM_xxxIFACE or to reuse RTM_xxxLINK (and activate ifi_family :-)). > @@ -61,6 +63,13 @@ > unsigned short rta_type; > }; > > +/* Structure to return per interface device flags */ > +struct ifp_if6info > +{ > + int ifindex; > + int flags; > +}; > + > /* Macros to handle rtattributes */ > > #define RTA_ALIGNTO 4 ditto. > @@ -331,6 +340,7 @@ > IFA_LABEL, > IFA_BROADCAST, > IFA_ANYCAST, > + IFA_IFFLAGS, > IFA_CACHEINFO > }; Don't change values. > diff -ruN linux-2.5.73.org/net/ipv6/addrconf.c test/linux-2.5.73/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > --- linux-2.5.73.org/net/ipv6/addrconf.c 2003-06-22 11:33:17.000000000 -0700 > +++ test/linux-2.5.73/net/ipv6/addrconf.c 2003-07-17 16:59:17.000000000 -0700 > @@ -2451,6 +2451,43 @@ > netlink_broadcast(rtnl, skb, 0, RTMGRP_IPV6_IFADDR, GFP_ATOMIC); > } > > +int inet6_dump_linkinfo(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb) > +{ > + int ifindex, flags; > + struct net_device *dev; : > static struct rtnetlink_link inet6_rtnetlink_table[RTM_MAX - RTM_BASE + 1] = { > [RTM_NEWADDR - RTM_BASE] = { .doit = inet6_rtm_newaddr, }, > [RTM_DELADDR - RTM_BASE] = { .doit = inet6_rtm_deladdr, }, > @@ -2459,6 +2496,7 @@ > [RTM_DELROUTE - RTM_BASE] = { .doit = inet6_rtm_delroute, }, > [RTM_GETROUTE - RTM_BASE] = { .doit = inet6_rtm_getroute, > .dumpit = inet6_dump_fib, }, > + [RTM_GETLNKINFO - RTM_BASE] = {.dumpit = inet6_dump_linkinfo, }, > }; > same as first comment for this part. -- Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org> GPG FP: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
