Hello!
> But I don't understand why we must walk socket table. If only
> one socket is going to receive this netlink_ack() built packet,
> why need we set error on any other socket?
Yes, indeed, only netlink_unicast is used there, no broadcasts.
> For example, I think this patch would solve all the problems.
It is the thing which netlink_set_err makes, actually.
> + sk = netlink_lookup(in_skb->sk->sk_protocol,
> + NETLINK_CB(in_skb).pid);
> + if (sk) {
> + sk->sk_err = ENOBUFS;
> + sk->sk_error_report(sk);
+ sock_put(sk);
> + }
> return;
> + }
Alexey
-
: 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
