On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 07:02:56PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > Quick follow-up: > > On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 06:18:57PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > > If ENOENT wasn't reported as EINVAL, We could even fall back to plain > > NLM_F_DUMP on older kernels. Maybe tackle that first and build upon > > that? > > Not sure what I was seeing, but I checked again and ENOENT is indeed > returned as it should. I'll look into the fall back idea then. Is the fallback really needed? As I said, if -stable kernel works with this approach, I think it should be fine.
