On 01.02.2011 22:28, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote: > On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote: > >>>> I guess you're relying on that the original message is appended to a >>>> nlmsgerr message. That doesn't seem right though, if you want to return >>>> something to userspace, you should construct a new message. >>> >>> The message we are processing here carried multiple commands (each having >>> an attribute with the line number of the given command) and one failed >>> from some reason. We have to notify the userspace which command, at what >>> line failed. For this reason the multi-command messages have got an >>> attribute, which can be filled out with the line number - that happens >>> here. The attribute is already there, the message is not enlarged, just >>> the empty value is overwritten with the proper value. >>> >>> The line number reporting works this way, tested in the testsuite too. >>> >>> If I had to construct a completely new message and sent it, that'd be more >>> or less the duplication of netlink_ack. Additionally I had to suppress >>> netlink from sending an errmsg/ack too. >> >> Hm, if I lie -EINTR to netlink, then I can construct and send the error >> message manually and keep NLM_F_ACK at the same time. What do you think? >> Please have a look at the attached patch. > > Oops, mistypeing fixed, here follow the hopefully good version. This looks fine to me. A comment about why it returns -EINTR would probably be a good idea though. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
