On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:05:40AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 8:55 AM Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > @@ -1547,6 +1547,28 @@ int ip_mroute_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname, sockptr_t optval,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +/* Execute if this ioctl is a special mroute ioctl */
> > +int ipmr_sk_ioctl(struct sock *sk, unsigned int cmd, void __user *arg)
> > +{
> > + switch (cmd) {
> > + /* These userspace buffers will be consumed by ipmr_ioctl() */
> > + case SIOCGETVIFCNT: {
> > + struct sioc_vif_req buffer;
> > +
> > + return sock_ioctl_inout(sk, cmd, arg, &buffer,
> > + sizeof(buffer));
> > + }
>
> More importantly, if we go down the path of demultiplexing in protocol
> independent code to call protocol specific handlers, then there there
> is no need to have them call protocol independent helpers like
> sock_ioct_inout again. Just call the protocol-specific ioctl handlers
> directly?
That is what I was expecting, but, the code is exactly the same and I
kept it in the generic section. This is what this code needs to do:
* Copy X byte from userspace
* sk->sk_prot->ioctl()
* Copy X bytes back to userspace
I tried to keep the code generic enough that it could be reused.
I can definitely push the same code to two different protocols, if you
prefer, no strong opinion.
